https://www.technocracy.news/2025-roster...in-europe/

Quote:2025 Roster: Bilderberg Meets In Europe, June 12-14

Bilderberg is where David Rockefeller and Zbigniew Brzezinski received the blessing to start the Trilateral Commission in 1972. It is the consummate networking group in the world. This year's invitation-only group includes AI and technocrats, journalists, military, pharma, politicians, and global institutions. Peter Thiel and Alex Karp are on the Steering Committee that picks the participants.

I watched it and felt the excitement as most of the world did about the moon landing....but...?

Just sayin'!  Don't know who came up with these candy names, but "Fun Sized" is anything but fun...even for a little kid.  Probably should call it "Joke Sized".  Oh, and "Snack Sized" isn't any sort of a 'snack' I know.

Before the World became morbidly obese, "Fun Sized" was about 2 lbs., and "Snack Sized" you could share with (4) in your tree fort.  Full sized Dad had to carry home in the back of his pickup, and you had to live along a rail siding or shipping port to take delivery of a "Family Sized".  (Okay, maybe I exaggerated just a little bit, but you get the idea).

I just picked up a bag of "Snack" sized Hershey bars, and I have to say I've smuggled shanks into the joint at Joiliet which were bigger than these little things!

Damn glad my brother is outta' that dump!

Just a simple question.

Who is more important...

Taylor Swift and Blake Lively, or Israel and Iran??

I'll leave you to answer.

Edit...And let's cut to the real chase here...which news story will YOU click on first????  (i.e. "Taylor Swift falls ill and pukes blood all over her new 845' super yacht in the middle of the Atlantic requiring an 'all hands" US Coast Guard and US Navy response"...versus..."Iran nukes Tel Aviv, tens of thousands inured and dead"...???

Personally, I think the former will get more clicks, as opposed to the latter!

Society is lost.

This phenomena has been going on world wide (well places that have electric lights) for some time now. Other than the many videos there have not been any answers just questions such as, "WHY?" 

Just thought I'd comment about something I've noticed.  ...

When you post a (generic) "Reply" to a thread, if you were the last person to post on this same thread, the new post often shows up as an 'edit' to your previous reply.  (not always, but sometimes; seems to be time driven).  Sometimes I like to just "Reply" to a thread without quoting a member (which the (in post) "Reply" feature does automatically).  I do this primarily to save space and prevent needless repetition.

So, a couple observations here:

1. When you do this (i.e. generic "Reply" to a thread, and you're the last poster), it is very difficult to see the difference between the two replies.  Yes, there is a (black) demarcation line, but it is single spaced and difficult to differentiate (especially in dark mode, which I use exclusively).  I wind up spacing down a couple lines and then inserting my own dotted line, then spacing down a couple more times before starting my 2nd reply.  This isn't very elegant.
   
2. I've also noticed the header on your post also now shows "edited by (name) and a time stamp".  However, the 2nd "Reply" wasn't actually an edit at all, it was merely a different reply.
   

Yes Bigfoot is real and unknown to most people he films VLOGS , on this particular vlog mysterious noises in the forest lead Foot to an encounter with an extra terrestrial dude with a surprise gift.



Hollywho ?

Quote:Joe Rogan recently had Zahi Hawass on his podcast. In a clip of another episode where he was recounting that interview, the famous Helicopter Hieroglyphs at Abydos were brought up, along with the 'wooden plane' which I assume is the Saqqara Bird. (Graham Hancock was also mentioned but let's not get into that).

Quote:Chapters: 0:00 Will the Iran War Be the Downfall of MAGA? 6:55 Fox News’ Pro-War Propaganda 12:42 The Never-Trumpers Pretending to Be On Trump’s Team 15:30 Attacks on Anti-War Voices 25:48 The CIA Is Too Powerful 35:00 Why Is Tom Cotton Working to Keep the JFK Files Classified? 41:16 Lindsey Graham’s Warmongering Motives 48:30 Why Was Nobody Held Accountable for the Iraq War? 54:12 The Spiritual War Is More Evident Than Ever 1:00:53 The California Riots 1:08:55 Why Leftists and Neocons Are Scared of the Term “Nationalist”

I knew JPF was going to blog about this one...

Quote:ABOUT THAT MOON SOLDIER…

June 16, 2025 / Joseph P. Farrell

As the world is watching the newest war between Israel and Iran, there are a number of stories that have fallen right off the radar, and I want to talk about these this week.  Right at the top of the "off-the-radar" list this week is the story of the US Secretary of the Army mentioning his quiet chat with a soldier who had been, or is, or is being assigned to, a post...

...on the Moon. In fact, so many of you sent me some version of this story that it clearly is on your minds, and judging from all the "what do you make of this" comments on the accompanying emails, you want to know what I think of it. So, a thank you to all of you who took the time to share the story and draw my attention to it. I am going to use the following version of the story which, again, many of you sent, as the basis for my remarks and high octane speculations:

Army Secretary Says He Spoke "Yesterday" To A U.S. Soldier "Who Is On The Moon"

And here's the crux interpretum of the story:

Quote:U.S. Army Secretary Dan Driscoll told "FOX and Friends" on Wednesday morning that the U.S. has astronauts currently "on the Moon." His comment was brief, unexplained, and not remarked upon by FOX News host Brian Kilmeade. He could have meant to say that there is an Army Colonel/NASA astronaut currently on the International Space Station, but he 100% said "on the Moon."

Answering a question about the parade scheduled for Saturday to mark the 250th anniversary of the U.S. Army, Secretary Daniel Driscoll said the following: "Young Americans get to see all the amazing thing the Army has done, whether it is helping with floods in North Carolina or wildfires in California. We talked to an astronaut yesterday who is on the Moon, who is a soldier. Including actually going to war and fighting to defend freedom."

As one commenter on this little foot-in-mouth episode observes, he probably meant to say "on the international space station," and simply misspoke under the pressure of the interview. I know that sounds odd and perhaps even implausible, but anyone who does a lot of interviews will tell you that it is very easy to do. I've done so myself on many occasions.  So there we have explanation number (1): it was simply a case of misspeaking.

But then there are the other possibilities. Possibility number (2) is that he intentionally "misspoke" and was sending a message to anyone playing the high stakes geo- and exo-politics game (that would be Russia, China, India, Japan, and Europe, in case you're wondering), but that the message is false. The message in the "oops, I misspoke" is really, "oops, I just let a huge national security secret out of the bag that we have soldiers on the Moon, which means we have a Moon base." But the message is one thing, and the truth of it quite another. In other words, he acted like he was making a mistake, and was intentionally misspeaking in order to lead people to the wrong conclusion, and hence, as those people are wondering whether or not he was telling the truth, it interferes with their ability to formulate an accurate strategic calculation of the USA's capabilities and intentions.

Which leads us to possibility number (3), that Mr. Driscoll inadvertently spoke the truth, and that there really are soldiers stationed on the Moon.  It's not the first time that someone in power has alluded to such possibilities. Recall that former Assistant Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Catherine Austin Fitts has remarked publicly, on more than one occasion, that while serving in Washington she was asked if she'd like to meet "an alien". It didn't stop there. President Reagan himself, in his memoirs, mentioned that in his initial presidential briefing, he was informed that the country had a space-lift capability of about 300 personnel, an amount far exceeding the capability of the space shuttle fleet at that time. Let unanswered in Mr. Reagan's memoirs was the question of where they might be "spacelifted" to, but the Moon is right next door, so to speak, and such a claim might explain why "we didn't go back."  Mr. Driscoll's comment suggests that we never stopped going, we just pretended to, and have been doing so covertly for some time.  Indeed, there were plans for atomic-powered Moon bases going back to the late 1950s, and one can find many of these on line. (Here's one of them: 1959 Project Horizon).  What's intriguing to notice in this regard is the timing of Mr. Driscoll's remarks. He is, after all, Secretary of the Army, and the Army's 250th birthday is what the big parade was all about. What better time to "appear to let something slip out" than now?  Then there were all those strange announcements from a few years ago; Germany, for example, was talking opening about building a 5G network on the Moon, bringing the internet to...well, to whomever would be (or was , or is) there...

But to my mind, one of the strongest things arguing for the plausibility of Mr. Driscoll's remarks is perhaps the one no one wants to talk about: commerce, and its protection. Everyone in "the space club" has been talking about Lunar bases for as long as there have been space programs, and China, of course, recently joined all the chatter with ambitious announcements about its own plans for a Moon base, and Russia chimed right in and said "we'll help!" They've made no secret of wanting to mine the Moon, and some people have proposed hauling asteroids back to the Moon for mining and processing. All this planned commerce means that the space lanes are going to have to be protected, and protection implies the militarization of space, like it or not.

So what Mr. Driscoll's remarks really might imply is that "space commerce" might have already begun... and that would seem in a round-about and loose sort of way to support my oft-articulated high octane speculation that the current economic and monetary flows make no sense: there's a lot of currency and other financial instruments sloshing around and there has been for some time. So much, in fact, that it should have led to massive inflation long before now... and yet... it hasn't happened. That implies that there is a lot of money leaving the circuit, and it's going somewhere. My hypothesis has always been that it may be going off world in some form or fashion, as clearing of accounts or, as Ms. Fitts has proposed on more than one occasion, as some sort of tribute or reparation.

All this speculation means that I, for one, am not in a rush to dismiss Mr. Driscoll's comment has a simple example of "misspeaking"...

And there's a final, disturbing thing to note about Secretary Driscoll's remarks that no one seems to be noticing. Notice what he said once again: "We talked to an astronaut yesterday who is on the Moon, who is a soldier. Including actually going to war and fighting to defend freedom." (Boldface emphasis in the original article, italicized emphasis added by me.)

Uhm... wait a minute, Mr. Driscoll. Are you saying that there is some sort of combat taking place on the Moon? and if so, with whom? China? Russia? Japan? India? Moon Nazis in some sort of Iron Sky scenario? Or... someone else? Did Mr. Driscoll not just let a Moon base secret out of the bag, but also that we're already in some sort of War of the Worlds?  One recalls Mr. Gorbachev's summary of his summit with Mr. Reagan in Reykjavik, Iceland, in the 1980s. Mr. Gorbachev stated that Mr. Reagan asked him very directly that  if the USA were ever invaded by "ET", would the Soviet Union help? And Mr. Gorbachev stated that he replied with a "Yes, of course."

It all does make one wonder...

See you on the flip side...