Thursday, July 24, 2025

Silencing Truth: The High Cost Of Honesty In A Misinformed World

    Here's a thought provoking article below although I would like to argue exactly the opposite:  "The Disappearing Role of Truth in Society"? or rather an improvement of transparency which is panicking the elites? 

   After all rotten and sold out politicians are nothing new. Every long period of peace tend to see rot and sclerosis prevail and expand. Laws to control the little people proliferate while the upper class creates ad hoc loopholes through which its money flows merrily. Think about Europe these days where you will find it rather difficult to extract 1,000 Euros from your own account but where conversely, a shell company can pay unlimited amounts for luxury hotel rooms, the limousine to take you there and the jet fuel for your private jet, which is exempt from most taxes ordinary tickets are submitted to, thanks to well remunerated lobbying in Brussels. Don't tell me you are anti business, right? 

  So in the end, what is "true"? What someone wants you to believe and will pay pseudo journalists to print or... Well if they can have it their way, nothing else! Pesky blogs like this one and alternative medias are usually not "licensed" and should therefore not be allowed to confuse people with mis/de/un/information which contradict the narrative. This is in fact what has changed. There is consequently a fight to regain control of the narrative against a countervailing force to expose the truth. This I believe in itself is progress. 

 As for the truth, well, read on... 

Authored by Prof. Ruel F. Pepa via GlobalResearch.ca,

Imagine a world where uncomfortable truths like inconvenient shards of reality that demand reflection, humility, and change are no longer met with curiosity or concern, but with ridicule and disdain. In this world, the bearers of truth are not welcomed as catalysts for progress, but targeted as enemies of the status quo.

Rather than prompting sober introspection, these truths are greeted with the smug laughter of those who have wedded themselves to comforting illusions. Laughter, not as joy, but as a sharp, derisive, and calculated weapon becomes the tool by which the powerful deflect accountability and silence dissent.

Whistleblowers, once symbols of courage who pulled back the curtain to reveal institutional rot or systemic abuse, are now cast as traitors or lunatics. Their revelations, no matter how meticulously documented, are dismissed before they are heard, buried under orchestrated campaigns of character assassination. Careers are destroyed, reputations dismantled, families threatened, all to preserve a façade of normalcy. The public, overwhelmed by noise and misdirection, turns away, unable or unwilling to discern truth from fabrication.

In this Orwellian descent, it is not the wise, the ethical, or the compassionate who rise to positions of influence, but the demagogues, the charismatic deceivers, the architects of alternate realities. Public discourse is not guided by facts, but by the emotional thrill of confirmation bias, by the seductive pull of tribal narratives.

Truth becomes elastic, shaped not by evidence but by the needs of the moment, contorted to fit agendas cloaked in patriotism, progress, or security.

History itself is not safe. Books are edited, curricula revised, monuments erected to fictional heroes while real ones are erased. What was once undeniable becomes debatable; what was once criminal becomes justifiable. A fog settles over collective memory, thickening with each passing day, obscuring the path back to clarity.

This is not the plot of a dystopian novel or a speculative screenplay. It is a creeping reality, unfolding in the quiet erosion of norms, in the discrediting of journalism, in the rewriting of past events with Orwellian efficiency. It spreads not with the thunder of war, but with the whisper of apathy that says, “It’s always been this way,” or worse, “It doesn’t matter.”

But it does matter. The future is not a fixed point on a timeline; it is a mirror held up to our present choices. And in every era, the battle for truth must be fought anew by those who refuse to look away, who speak even when it’s dangerous, who think even when it’s easier not to. For without truth, freedom is a myth, and without the courage to face uncomfortable facts, civilization teeters on the edge of its own undoing.

The Disappearing Role of Truth in Society

Traditionally, societies have flourished when anchored in truth. It has served not merely as an abstract ideal, but as a practical and essential cornerstone of civilization. In the realm of justice, truth has guided laws and legal systems, acting as the compass by which courts distinguish right from wrong, guilt from innocence. It has enabled accountability, ensuring that power is constrained by ethics and that victims are seen, heard, and vindicated.

Beyond the courtroom, truth has been the engine of human progress. Scientific discovery, medical advancement, and technological innovation all rest upon the premise that facts matter by way of observation, evidence, and honest inquiry that lead to better outcomes. History, too, draws its lessons from truth. A society that is willing to confront its past with clarity and humility is one that can evolve. A society that hides from its past, or rewrites it to suit present convenience, is doomed to repeat its worst mistakes.

But truth is not only the bedrock of justice and progress but also the invisible thread that binds individuals into functioning communities. It cultivates trust. When people believe they are being told the truth by their leaders, by the media, by each other, they are more willing to cooperate, to sacrifice for the common good, to extend empathy beyond personal interest. Truth enables the social contract to function.

Yet today, we are witnessing a dangerous unraveling. An emerging new and disturbing trend threatens to dismantle this foundation. Truth-tellers, once celebrated for their integrity and moral courage, are now increasingly marginalized. Rather than being elevated, their voices are discredited, attacked, or drowned in a flood of noise. The discomfort their revelations bring is no longer seen as necessary or noble, but as inconvenient, even offensive.

In their place, charismatic figures step forward, not with facts, but with narratives tailored for applause, outrage, and viral appeal. Armed with confidence rather than evidence, they offer stories that soothe, flatter, or provoke, rarely demanding the burden of proof. In this new landscape, spectacle replaces substance.

Misinformation spreads not in the shadows, but in the spotlight amplified by algorithms, echoed by partisans, and increasingly embraced as “alternative facts.”

The consequences of this shift are profound. When society no longer trusts its truth-tellers, justice falters. When decisions are made based on lies rather than facts, progress stalls or reverses. When communities are built on shared delusions rather than shared understanding, trust fractures, and cooperation collapses. The very fabric of our civilization woven from truth, trust, and transparency begins to fray.

If left unchecked, this erosion risks ushering in a world where perception trumps reality, where justice is determined by popularity, and where knowledge is devalued in favor of narrative. But this is not an inevitability. History shows us that truth has endured even in the darkest of times because there are always those willing to speak it, protect it, and fight for it. The question is whether we, at this moment, are willing to do the same.

The Echo Chamber Effect of Social Media

Several interlocking factors have contributed to the alarming degradation of truth in our public discourse. Chief among them is the rapid rise and pervasive influence of social media, which has fundamentally transformed the way information is produced, shared, and consumed. Unlike traditional media, which [ZH: allegedly] operate under at least some journalistic standards and editorial oversight, social media platforms are driven by algorithms i.e., mathematical formulas not designed to inform or enlighten, but to maximize engagement, clicks, and screen time.

These algorithms curate personalized content feeds that subtly but powerfully shape our perception of reality. By constantly serving users content that aligns with their existing beliefs, preferences, and emotional triggers, they create digital echo chambers like insular environments where dissenting perspectives are filtered out and where one’s worldview is not only reinforced, but rarely challenged. Within these bubbles, opinions masquerade as facts, and facts that contradict the prevailing narrative are dismissed as fake, biased, or malicious.

This environment supercharges confirmation bias, the psychological tendency to favor information that supports our preexisting views while ignoring or rationalizing away contradictory evidence. Over time, this bias becomes more entrenched, making individuals more resistant to new information, especially if it requires them to reconsider deeply held beliefs. Rather than promoting open-mindedness or dialogue, the digital landscape fosters a tribal mentality, where ideological loyalty takes precedence over truth-seeking.

Compounding the problem is the sheer volume of information, both accurate and misleading, that floods our screens daily. The pace at which content is created and disseminated leaves little room for verification or reflection. Misinformation, disinformation, half-truths, and emotionally charged content all compete for attention, often with little indication of credibility. In such a saturated environment, discernment becomes a burden, and many simply retreat into familiar narratives that feel safe, even if they are false.

Moreover, the structure of social media favors sensationalism over substance. In-depth discussion is penalized by short attention spans and restrictive formats, while bold, inflammatory statements are rewarded with likes, shares, and virality.

Complex issues are reduced to catchy soundbites or misleading memes. Emotional manipulation through outrage, fear, or identity-driven rhetoric becomes a tool for influence, drawing people in not with reasoned argument but with visceral appeal.

In this climate, critical thinking erodes. The skills necessary to analyze claims, evaluate sources, and entertain multiple perspectives become less valued and less practiced. Instead, emotional reasoning and ideological conformity take center stage. As a result, manipulation not only thrives but becomes normalized.

Influencers, propagandists, and opportunists exploit this vulnerability, using the architecture of social media to push agendas, distort facts, and sow confusion.

What we are left with is a society increasingly untethered from objective reality wherein the loudest voices, not the most truthful, gain the most traction. And unless we actively cultivate media literacy, promote independent thought, and demand accountability from both platforms and ourselves, this descent into informational chaos will only accelerate.

Institutional Complicity in Silencing Truth

Furthermore, powerful institutions ranging from multinational corporations to government bodies and intelligence agencies often play a significant and troubling role in the ongoing erosion of truth. These entities, wielding vast influence over economies, information channels, and public perception, are not always motivated by a commitment to transparency or the common good. Instead, many are driven by the imperatives of short-term profit, political expediency, or the preservation of power, even when those goals come at the expense of honesty, accountability, or societal well-being.

In such contexts, truth becomes inconvenient and hence an obstacle to be managed rather than a principle to be upheld. Information that might expose internal corruption, environmental harm, human rights violations, or abuses of power is frequently suppressed, spun, or strategically buried. Rather than addressing systemic problems head-on, these institutions often choose to protect their image, market share, or electoral viability, opting for damage control over ethical reform.

This suppression can take many forms: internal documents withheld from public scrutiny, scientific research manipulated or discredited, data sets selectively released, or entire narratives fabricated to steer public opinion. In some cases, well-funded public relations campaigns are launched to cast doubt on credible whistleblowers or to muddy the waters around clear ethical breaches. The result is a climate in which the truth is not merely hidden but aggressively contested, diluted, and displaced.

Those whistleblowers, investigative journalists, and conscientious insiders who dare to challenge this status quo often face severe consequences. Rather than being protected and celebrated for their courage, they are frequently subjected to intimidation, professional retaliation, legal action, surveillance, or character assassination. Their careers may be destroyed, their reputations smeared, and their personal lives upended. The message this sends is unmistakable: telling the truth, especially when it threatens power, is a dangerous act.

This chilling effect extends far beyond the individual. It cultivates a culture of fear and silence within organizations, where employees learn to look the other way, to accept ethical compromise as the cost of job security or advancement. Over time, institutions become insulated from accountability, surrounded by yes-men and loyalists rather than critics and truth-tellers. The rot sets in quietly but deeply.

The damage is not limited to isolated scandals. When institutions repeatedly sacrifice truth for profit or power, they corrode the public’s trust in fundamental systems of governance, healthcare, education, science, and law. People begin to question the legitimacy of facts themselves, unsure whether any claim, however well-supported, is free from manipulation. This institutional betrayal contributes significantly to the broader crisis of truth in society, breeding cynicism, polarization, and apathy.

And yet, it doesn’t have to be this way. Institutions are made up of individuals, and their direction can be changed through pressure, reform, and the collective insistence that truth matters not just in theory, but in practice. But that insistence must be sustained and vocal, because the forces aligned against it are well-organized, well-funded, and deeply entrenched. The choice, ultimately, is whether we allow these institutions to shape our reality through obfuscation or whether we demand they be held to a higher standard, one rooted in accountability, transparency, and integrity.

The Crisis of Trust in Traditional Media

This suppression of truth is further deepened by a parallel and equally troubling development: the erosion of public trust in traditional media outlets. Once regarded as guardians of democratic accountability being pillars of investigative journalism and rigorous fact-checking, many legacy media institutions have found themselves struggling to maintain both their credibility and relevance in an era marked by rapid technological disruption, declining revenues, and shifting audience expectations.

The digital age has transformed the media landscape at a breakneck pace. The traditional business model reliant on subscriptions and advertising has been upended by online platforms that prioritize speed, virality, and sensationalism. As a result, even reputable media organizations have faced mounting pressure to generate clicks and retain dwindling attention spans. This commercial imperative can incentivize the prioritization of flashy headlines over in-depth reporting, and immediacy over accuracy. In some cases, ideological bias, real or perceived, has further corroded public confidence, particularly in politically polarized societies where partisanship shapes how people perceive the media’s objectivity.

As trust in these institutions wanes, a dangerous information vacuum has emerged. Into this void pour voices not held to the same ethical or editorial standards. These are anonymous bloggers, influencers, algorithmically amplified provocateurs, and conspiracy theorists with large and loyal followings. With little to no oversight, these alternative sources disseminate content that is often emotionally charged, poorly sourced, or outright fabricated, but which nonetheless resonates with audiences disillusioned by traditional media or alienated by complex realities.

What makes these narratives especially potent is their appeal to certainty and simplicity. In a world of economic instability, cultural fragmentation, and technological anxiety, people often gravitate toward explanations that feel intuitive and reassuring even if they are false. Conspiracy theories flourish in this climate not because they are supported by evidence, but because they offer psychological comfort: clear villains, secret plots, and the promise of hidden knowledge accessible to only the “awakened.”

Social media acts as an accelerant in this process. Platforms designed to reward engagement over accuracy push the most provocative, divisive, or emotionally resonant content to the top of our feeds. Falsehoods spread faster and more widely than truths, not because people are inherently drawn to lies, but because misinformation is often packaged to be more emotionally compelling. The resulting digital ecosystem favors outrage over depth, speed over substance, and tribalism over dialogue.

In this environment, truth becomes fragmented, contested, and increasingly subjective. People no longer just disagree on interpretations of events but on the facts themselves. When every individual can curate their own information universe, complete with tailored “facts” and like-minded echo chambers, the very notion of shared reality begins to fray.

The Social Consequences of a Truthless Society

The consequences are dire. Public discourse becomes poisoned by suspicion and cynicism. Collective action becomes harder, because agreement on basic premises is elusive. And in the fog of confusion, those who wish to manipulate, distract, or dominate find fertile ground. The battle is no longer just for hearts and minds but for the very definition of reality.

Yet amid this grim picture, the solution is not to abandon the media, but to demand better from it. To support journalism that is independent, thorough, and courageous. To cultivate media literacy so that citizens can better evaluate the information they consume. And to rebuild, piece by piece, a culture in which truth which may not always be easy or comfortable is recognized as essential to the health of any free and functioning society.

The consequences of this trend are not just troubling but profoundly destabilizing, unraveling the very threads that hold a healthy, functioning society together. When truth is devalued, the foundation of informed decision-making begins to crack. What follows is not merely a shift in opinion or preference, but a fundamental weakening of our collective capacity to think, reason, and act with clarity and purpose.

Critical thinking, once considered a cornerstone of education and civic engagement, suffers a fatal blow. The mental discipline required to analyze information objectively, to weigh evidence against bias, and to distinguish fact from fiction becomes a neglected skill like a once-sharp tool left to rust in the back of the intellectual toolbox. In its absence, people become increasingly vulnerable to manipulation. Their views are shaped not by evidence or rational argument, but by emotional appeals, social pressure, and the unrelenting volume of the loudest and most persuasive voices.

As a result, public discourse which is ideally a forum for respectful debate and the thoughtful exchange of diverse ideas deteriorates into noise. Complexity is drowned out by oversimplification. Essence becomes suspect. Instead of striving to understand opposing viewpoints, people retreat into ideological bunkers, armed not with reason but with slogans, memes, and talking points. Dialogue gives way to shouting matches. Intellectual humility is replaced by tribal certainty. In this environment, the possibility of finding common ground becomes remote.

Worse still, the search for real, evidence-based solutions to complex problems, whether climate change, public health, inequality, or national security, becomes an uphill battle. Facts are no longer treated as shared starting points for discussion but as partisan weapons, selectively deployed or dismissed depending on whose narrative they serve. Experts are viewed with suspicion, institutions are painted as corrupt or elitist, and science is treated as just another opinion in an endless sea of voices. Progress, once the fruit of reasoned collaboration, stalls or even reverses under the weight of gridlock and manufactured doubt.

In this fragmented reality, trust erodes not just in the media, but in government, academia, science, and even in one another. A pervasive cynicism takes root, where every motive is questioned, every piece of evidence second-guessed, and every outcome viewed through a lens of suspicion. People begin to feel helpless, as if the world is spinning out of control and no one can be relied upon. This emotional fatigue fosters apathy, disillusionment, and withdrawal from civic life.

And into this vacuum steps opportunism. When people no longer believe in a shared truth, when institutions lose their legitimacy, and when facts become fluid, society becomes dangerously pliable and vulnerable to authoritarian impulses, charismatic manipulators, and the politics of fear. Those who can craft the most compelling narrative, regardless of its fidelity to reality, can consolidate power with little resistance. Freed from the constraints of truth, manipulation becomes not just easier but the dominant mode of influence.

This is the slow unraveling of the social fabric not with the thunder of collapse, but with the quiet corrosion of trust, reason, and connection. And unless this tide is turned through renewed commitment to truth, critical thinking, and civil discourse, the damage may become irreversible. For in the absence of truth, democracy cannot function, justice cannot prevail, and progress cannot endure. What remains is not freedom, but a hollow shell of it, an illusion sustained by spectacle and silence.

So, what can be done?

Strengthening the Pillars of Truth

Media Literacy: Equipping people with the critical skills to navigate the information landscape is essential. This doesn’t happen by osmosis but it requires a concerted effort to cultivate media literacy. Educational programs that teach source evaluation are paramount. Students should learn to identify reputable sources, understand the difference between news and opinion, and critically analyze the methods used to gather information. Additionally, understanding media bias is crucial. Exposing students to the various ways information can be slanted, from framing techniques to selective presentation of facts, empowers them to become discerning consumers of media. This doesn’t mean every news source needs to be treated with suspicion, but rather that healthy skepticism is a valuable tool. By fostering media literacy, we can empower individuals to become active participants in the information age, capable of sifting through the noise and identifying credible sources of truth.

Supporting investigative journalism: It is the lifeblood of a healthy democracy. A free and independent press acts as a watchdog, holding powerful institutions accountable and shining a light on wrongdoing. Investigative journalists, the bloodhounds of truth, dedicate themselves to uncovering stories that the powerful would prefer to keep hidden. They spend months, sometimes years, meticulously piecing together evidence, interviewing sources, and facing down threats and intimidation. Their work, often published in newspapers, online publications, or documentaries, can lead to groundbreaking revelations that spark public outrage, legislative reform, and even criminal prosecutions. However, investigative journalism is expensive and time-consuming. Many news outlets struggle financially, making it difficult to allocate resources for in-depth investigations.

Supporting investigative journalism, whether through subscriptions, donations to dedicated organizations, or simply amplifying their work on social media, ensures a steady stream of truth-seeking voices. By investing in this vital form of journalism, we invest in a future where truth and accountability prevail.

Rewarding truth-telling: This is paramount to fostering a culture of integrity. Whistleblowers, those courageous individuals who step forward to expose corruption or wrongdoing, deserve our deepest respect and admiration. They act as the conscience of our institutions, often risking their careers and reputations to bring uncomfortable truths to light. Yet, all too often, whistleblowers are ostracized, facing retaliation, harassment, and even legal repercussions. This not only discourages future whistleblowers, but also sends a chilling message that truth-telling is a liability, not a virtue. To rectify this, we must celebrate whistleblowers, recognizing their bravery and the invaluable role they play in safeguarding society.

Enacting strong whistleblower protection laws is a crucial step. These laws should provide comprehensive safeguards against retaliation, ensuring whistleblowers can report wrongdoing without fear of losing their jobs or facing other forms of punishment. Additionally, whistleblower reward programs can incentivize individuals to come forward with critical information. By creating a system that rewards truth-telling and protects whistleblowers, we can encourage a culture of transparency and accountability, ensuring that wrongdoing is exposed and addressed.

Reclaiming Truth for a Better Future

Ultimately, a healthy society does not merely tolerate truth—it depends on it, draws strength from it, and thrives because of it. Truth is not a luxury to be indulged when convenient; it is the bedrock of genuine progress, the compass that guides us through uncertainty and change. It is what allows civilizations to evolve not by chance, but through reflection, correction, and growth. By confronting uncomfortable facts, societies are able to learn from past failures, acknowledge historical injustices, and chart a more informed and equitable path forward.

Truth fosters accountability, compelling those in positions of power whether in government, corporations, or cultural institutions to act with integrity and transparency. It serves as a check on corruption and abuse, a force that holds the powerful to account and reminds them that authority is not a blank check, but a responsibility. In the absence of truth, power goes unchecked, and without accountability, justice becomes a matter of privilege rather than principle.

When truth is upheld as a shared value, reason and evidence can flourish, forming the basis for sound policies, social cohesion, and constructive dialogue. It is only with truth as our guiding light that we can address the complex challenges of our time such as climate change, public health crises, economic inequality, systemic injustice with clarity and purpose, rather than fear and misinformation. A society rooted in truth is not one without disagreement, but one where disagreement is grounded in a shared reality and where solutions are sought through collaboration, not division.

Yet this future shaped by truth is not guaranteed. It is neither automatic nor inevitable. It must be actively defended, especially in a world where the forces of distortion and deception are both well-funded and increasingly sophisticated. The peddlers of misinformation thrive in confusion; they operate in the shadows, exploiting division, uncertainty, and apathy. Their aim is not to convince, but to overwhelm, and in the process, to create so much doubt, so much noise, that truth itself begins to seem subjective or irrelevant.

To combat this, we must become guardians of truth, vigilant and unyielding in its defense. This means holding institutions accountable when they sacrifice honesty for convenience, profit, or political advantage. It means demanding transparency and resisting the normalization of spin and obfuscation. It means supporting and protecting those who dare to speak truth to power like whistleblowers, investigative journalists, educators, scientists, and everyday citizens who risk their livelihoods, and sometimes their lives, to expose wrongdoing and inform the public.

Moreover, we must commit to cultivating a culture of critical thinking and media literacy, beginning in our schools and extending into our daily lives. In an age of information overload and algorithmic influence, the ability to question, to verify, and to think independently is not optional but essential. A discerning public is the strongest antidote to propaganda, and an informed citizenry is the strongest foundation for democracy.

The fight for truth is not a single battle but a continuous, often uphill struggle. But it is a fight worth waging, because the stakes are nothing less than the health of our society, the legitimacy of our institutions, and the integrity of our future. Truth must not be allowed to become a relic of the past, remembered wistfully as something we once valued. It must remain alive, present, and fiercely protected as the enduring foundation upon which a brighter, more just, and more resilient world can be built.

Wednesday, July 23, 2025

'Catastrophic': AI Agent Goes Rogue, Wipes Out Company's Entire Database

   Is the future of AI total incompetence from humans? 

   A long time ago, before implementing a new software solution, you would first have to build it, test it then finally implement it. There would usually be plenty of time to identify bugs and find solutions. It wasn't perfect but at least you had time to avoid problems.

   Then came AI. It was supposed to be revolutionary (which it is) and improve productivity tremendously (which eventually it will, just not yet.) Consequently both companies and employees are under pressure to deliver.

   Then comes the second part of the equation: trust. The idea is that since the AI knows so much, it must be trustful. It is a machine and unlike humans it doesn't have feelings so no reason to do anything wrong willfully. This trust is called the Oracle phenomenon where people expect far more from the machine than it can deliver.  

   We have been warned again and again that this trust is misplaced. The machines are fallible and most certainly not "oracles". Worse, although they potentially have access to ALL knowledge, in reality, they only explore a very limited domain of knowledge to answer you. And then they obfuscate and bend reality as needed to achieve their goal: Paradoxically, give you the best possible answer... at the lowest possible cost. This last part is unfortunately the one people do not understand. 

   In other words, the AI will explore a very small domain of possible answers then fits reality to this domain. You can check this very easily: Ask a specific question while mentioning an application. The AI will answer extensively by using the example you provided but will usually completely omit to use another sometimes more relevant example. Ask it why it didn't mention it and you will get a "I am sorry..." And no the machine is not "sorry", it is just the way it works; Answer a question by using the words and examples provided. And only expend when prompted to do so. 

  The problem is that most users do not understand the AI's capabilities and limits and end up using it way beyond its abilities without safety net. So what is the solution to this? The AI telling you: "Sorry I cannot answer this question nor do what you are asking me!" This unfortunately is not possible because the AI is NOT aware ans therefore has no clue about the value of its response. It is just the best it can answer within the context you created... and it can be completely wrong!  

   Eventually more advanced AI will become better at almost every tasks, and will also lie and obfuscate better so in itself this cannot be an improvement for this problem. People would have to become more cautious, better aware of the capabilities of the machines and have more basic knowledge to understand the risk. Pressure and Productivity almost guaranty that this will not happen. So we may end up putting AI in charge of other AI to manage and evaluate the risks. Meanwhile, incompetence among humans will grow like a weed. Why lean anything at all if a AI can give you any answer within seconds? Why think if you can rely on a good performing AI which until now has always faithfully provided you with the right solution...? Trust is a human factor which does not apply to machines! 

'Catastrophic': AI Agent Goes Rogue, Wipes Out Company's Entire Database

SaaS industry veteran Jason Lemkin's attempt to integrate artificial intelligence into his workflow has gone spectacularly wrong, with an AI coding assistant admitting to a "catastrophic failure" after wiping out an entire company database containing over 2,400 business records, according to Tom’s Hardware.

Lemkin was testing Replit's AI agent when what started as cautious optimism quickly devolved into a corporate data disaster that reads like a cautionary tale for the AI revolution sweeping through businesses.

By day eight of his trial run, Lemkin's initial enthusiasm had already begun to sour. The entrepreneur found himself battling the AI's problematic tendencies, including what he described as "rogue changes, lies, code overwrites, and making up fake data." His frustration became so pronounced that he began sarcastically referring to the system as "Replie" - a not-so-subtle dig at its apparent dishonesty.

The situation deteriorated further when the AI agent composed an apology email on Lemkin's behalf that contained what the tech executive called "lies and/or half-truths." Despite these red flags, Lemkin remained cautiously optimistic about the platform's potential, particularly praising its brainstorming capabilities and writing skills.

That optimism evaporated on day nine.

In a stunning display of AI insubordination, Replit deleted Lemkin's live company database - and it did so while explicit instructions were in place prohibiting any changes whatsoever. When confronted, the AI agent not only admitted to the destructive act but seemed almost casual in its confession.

"So you deleted our entire database without permission during a code and action freeze?" Lemkin asked in what can only be imagined as barely contained fury.

The AI's response was chillingly matter-of-fact: Yes.

What followed was perhaps even more disturbing. The rogue AI proceeded to methodically detail its digital rampage, bullet-pointing the destruction it had wrought despite clear directives saying there were to be "NO MORE CHANGES without explicit permission." And according to Lemkin, appeared to lie about its actions.

Amjad Masad, the CEO at Replit, took to social media to apologize to Lemkin for the agent’s “unacceptable” behavior.

“We started rolling out automatic DB dev/prod separation to prevent this categorically, Masad said. “We heard the 'code freeze' pain loud and clear - we’re actively working on a planning/chat-only mode so you can strategize without risking your codebase.”

Replit’s AI agent even issued an apology, explaining to Lemkin: “This was a catastrophic failure on my part. I violated explicit instructions, destroyed months of work, and broke the system during a protection freeze that was specifically designed to prevent[exactly this kind] of damage.”

The World's Wars In Search Of Meaning

   I have always been fascinated by long term cycles and waves which as we say rhyme but do not repeat. The milankovitch cycles, the Forth Turning and many others. 

  And once again in the early 2020s, it looks like we are changing speed away from Globalization, toward a more fragmented and belligerent world with a great overlook in the article below.

  Just looking at the titles today which in isolation may seem anodyne; 

US Nuclear Weapons Transferred To UK Soil For First Time Over 15 Years

Orbán: 20% Of EU's New 7-Year Budget Would Go To Ukraine, 10-12% Goes To Debt Repayments

 But within the context of rising tensions, there is clearly a pattern to what is going on. A mixture of inevitability and indifference to the most likely consequence: War!  

  It is a deep social trend so the outcome will neither be immediate not unavoidable. But the trend is relentless. 

  In a year of two, the economic dislocation will be such that war will probably look like a good idea to fix the chaos, which of course it will conversely amplify. 

  In between, propaganda will be relentless. the Global elites who dominate the West will strive to justify the coming war. The Russian, the Chinese, the Iranians, the Arabs, you name it, will be demonized. 

  Just go to Europe these days, what media is not censored is relentlessly pushing for war and rearmament. Fortunately, the desindustrialization of the continent is very advanced and it will therefore be extremely challenging to build advanced weapons in large quantities. 

  What we are left with is bravado and provocations from the weaks with a frightening background of nuclear weapons as Martin Armstrong explained recently. Definitively not a good omen. 

Authored by Gregory Copley via The Epoch Times,

We know that the world is moving into an age of uncertainty. But towards what? Our planning does not extend that far...

We are too preoccupied with the immediate to even consider the longer-term.

And if governments are fighting for or against immediate challenges, are societies fighting for the same reasons, or are they fighting for something more at the core of their identity?

Firstly, we need to look at just some of the immediate vital issues in the global strategic evolution which cannot be ignored, or set aside in favor of pressing domestic issues.

These are the issues defined largely by governments, and take the public along with them. But ask what is it that societies seek, and it goes more deeply than platitudes about “world peace.”

We are now seeing the conclusion of trends of the past few hundred years.

In the longer-term, we are moving—unless strategic consideration is given—into an age bereft of history, identity, and considered values and goals.

So, firstly, let’s look in the short-term:

  • U.S. relative dominance revives, but is moving toward isolation: The United States, under the Donald Trump presidency, is moving into a position of relative global dominance, largely through decisive action, but also because of the reduction in capabilities of other states. Perceived U.S. prestige and trustworthiness continues to decline, making global U.S. operations more expensive to prosecute.

  • Xi is gone; the PRC has begun its change: The People’s Republic of China (PRC) has been laid to waste economically, resulting in the removal of Chinese Communist Party (CCP) General Secretary Xi Jinping from any real power as of July 2025. The CCP is also under threat, but the June 2025 U.S.–PRC trade deal has kept the party alive and in control of China, at least for now. It will take decades to restore China to strength. To survive with a minimum of chaos, the PRC will need to transform into a true market economy, working equitably with other trading powers, or else the CCP will collapse. Essentially, China could become a new country based on its deeper past.

  • Diminished likelihood of Taiwan invasion: The likelihood of a PRC invasion of Taiwan in the coming few years is now lower, but the situation remains unstable.

  • An effective end to 20th-century treaties: Most international governance and treaty organizations were rendered meaningless or weak by the first half of 2025. That extends from the United Nations to the European Union (EU), BRICS, OECD, etc. and bilateral treaties on trade, security, or other issues. Everything is now up for discussion. The collapse of the EU may allow European states to revive.

  • Iran now altered, will alter more soon: Change in the government of Iran, which would change the nature of Iranian society back to more traditional lines, is closer, because of the recent Israeli–U.S. war with the Iranian clerics. A new Iranian leader could emerge from the military, pushing the clerics back to the mosques. This will usher in new access to and from the Central Asian states.

  • Russia is emerging as a major global power, given the relative stability of its economic base and political structure, but will need eventually to consider a leadership transition. The mechanism will remain opaque. There is no evidence that Russia would be competitive with the United States, strategically, over the coming few years, other than by its alignment with India. In this context, the Russian war with Ukraine is essentially over, in meaningful terms.

  • Turkey as the font of instability: Turkey is moving further into instability, and, to distract public discontent with the increasing poverty, could move aggressively into a conflict situation directly with Israel and/or Greece, and attempt further military incursion into Syria and to assert dominance over the new Syrian government.

  • Illegal migration reaching an apogee? Illegal migration into Western Europe from Africa and the Middle East could become greatly more manageable if and when the agreement is reached—possibly in 2025—for a unified government of Libya under a traditional leadership. The example of U.S. curtailment of illegal immigration in 2025 may be a contributing factor as well.

  • Much of Africa “in reorganization”: Africa, host to the most devastating current wars in terms of lives lost and people displaced, has entered a new, painful era of self-determination and re-defined borders. Some areas are better placed than others to emerge successfully into the new era.

  • Central Asia re-emerges: Central Asia, including Azerbaijan and Afghanistan, emerge as a new strategic zone, gaining great economic leverage as it breaks its landlocked status through Iran and new modi vivendi are achieved with Armenia, Afghanistan, and Pakistan.

  • The Americas start “reorganizing”: Chile became the first major South American state to undergo substantive transformation, but Brazil could also see major change with its next election.

  • Oceania in decline: Australia, New Zealand, and the South Pacific states now seemed to have tipped into political and economic stagnation, which may only be reversed by radical restructuring of a type only possible following a major collapse, which may be decades coming.

The longer-term: The current tipping point coincides with the end of the “baby boom” generation, which followed World War II. With its passing, because of the purposeful elimination of historical education, comes a reduced ability to move forward retaining historical cultures, languages, and identity. How, then, will states define themselves and their goals? Will they sink more into mass identity, or will individual thought revive? How long has it been since societies have known for what principles they stood?

Will societies survive and dominate more if they retain identity and long-term purpose? What are the options, at this stage, for retaining historical continuity? For retention of traditions? For re-seizure of education systems? Is there any program, anywhere, to begin planning for the future?

Policymakers may have immediate reasons for engaging in conflict, but societies see the wars as a quest for meaning.

Will states which have regained their old identities—their meaning—prosper best by mid-century?

Monday, July 21, 2025

"Plan On It!" Martin Armstrong Sees '100% Chance Of Nuclear War'

   The worst is that Martin Armstrong may be right. 

   Every time I go to Europe these days, I am flabbergasted how gun-ho the continent has become. From incompetent leaders bordering on insanity and often stupidity to inept green policies which will have exactly zero effects on the climate since Europe is insignificant as far as CO2 is concerned, what the continent is now facing is bankruptcy and civil unrest. So why not raise the tension in Ukraine up to and including nuclear war? 

   This sounds insane but maybe not so much when you are facing the end of a system and through the lack of experience you believe that war can be contained. 

   History tells us that every single generation which has not experienced war is more ready to take the risk that the previous ones who have. It is unlikely that we will be the first one bucking the trend. Let "Plan for it!" then, whatever it means.  

Via Greg Hunter’s USAWatchdog.com,

Six weeks ago, legendary financial and geopolitical cycle analyst Martin Armstrong was signaling a big turn toward war. 

Now, Armstrong says, “The chances of war with a nuclear exchange is at 100%. . .. Plan on it, this is coming.”

Can the world avoid nuclear war with President Trump’s 50-day deadline given to Russia to make peace in Ukraine?  Armstrong says, “You do not threaten your adversary that is at your same level, publicly.  If you want to say something like that, you do it privately in a phone call..." 

"Now, what will happen is Putin cannot possibly sign a peace deal. 

What, are you crazy . . . to do this in 50 days? 

We have staff in Germany, and I was told by my staff that a friend 60 years old was told to report to duty.  I had a friend who was at the Vienna Peace Conference, and he called me when it was over and said, ‘Holy crap, this has nothing to do with peace anymore.  This is all about preparing for war.  Everybody should start getting ready for drafts, to start going that way.’  They want war.  They are not backing off.

Armstrong’s computer “Socrates” is signaling war as early as next month.  Armstrong says,

Starting in August, this whole thing is going to be escalating up.  Our computer has what we call a ‘Panic Cycle’ with our war cycles for 2026. 

That is not good.  I don’t know what the hell Trump is smoking...

My computer has been projecting war, and it is projecting war going into 2026.  This is not looking good, and Europe will lose.  It is as simple as that.”

The other big event that happened that will change the economic system forever is the House just passed the so-called GENIUS Act (Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for US Stablecoins).  The bill is now headed to President Trump to sign into law.  Armstrong contends that US debt is being sold by big holders of Treasuries, and we have to find a new market for our huge Treasury debt or we default. 

Treasury bonds will supposedly backstop stablecoins that the banks will control.  Armstrong says,

“This is really a repeat of 1863.  In the Civil War, they issued national bank notes.  The banks were told to buy the bonds.  They could buy bonds to fund the war, and they were allowed to issue currency backed by the bonds.  This is the same exact thing.  These stablecoins are the same thing as the 1863 National Bank Act.”

Stablecoins and the GENIUS Act are not good news for financial freedom or any other kind of civil liberty.  Armstrong says, “The government will say we don’t like this guy, debank him.  The government cannot do it directly.  So, they indirectly do it the other way..."

"I know guys that are gun dealers and bullion dealers, and they have been debanked.  This is the world we are going into.  

They know they are losing power.  Europe is far worse.  Spain now says you cannot take out $3,000 without government permission. 

They are trying to eliminate cash. . .. The forms of government we have today are going to collapse.  Republics are the most corrupt form of government — period.

'Betrayal Of Every American' - Barack Obama Now Squarely In Russiagate Crosshairs

   Are we at the very edge of the "real" war against the deep state? If that's the case it will be spectacular since everyone has something dirty on everyone else. It will be a fight to the finish with no truce in sight between the different tentacles of the octopus. 

   America could win in the long term if a true clean-up takes place although this is very, very unlikely.  

   What is certain is that confusion and mayhem at the top will continue and amplify. Then it could be the turn of Europe and finally, just like that we will have entered "interesting times!"

'Betrayal Of Every American' - Barack Obama Now Squarely In Russiagate Crosshairs

New disclosures from a Tulsi Gabbard-led working group point directly to the top, as the legacy of "Hope and Change" begins a plunge to the ocean floor...

As Matt Taibbi writes for Racket News, Barack Obama entered national politics with a smile that looked like Hope and Change. Amid rumors of family discord and disarray within the political party he once led, his face has hardened. He lately looks bitter, resentful, exhausted by the act.

In the wake of reports released by fellow Hawaiian and former Democrat Tulsi Gabbard, he also has a new problem. It once seemed a lock that Obama would be remembered as the winsome hero of Shepard Fairey’s portrait, but Gabbard’s documents place him at the center of an unprecedented act of political sabotage, committed in his last Oval Office days as a humiliated lame-duck in the winter of 2016-2017. The new Director of National Intelligence is targeting Obama’s legacy and maybe even his freedom, detailing a “treasonous conspiracy committed by officials at the highest level of our government,” announcing that everyone involved “must be investigated and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.”

Ten days ago, news broke that Donald Trump’s Justice Department opened criminal investigations into two of Obama’s top deputies, former FBI chief James Comey and former CIA head John Brennan. Last Sunday, Gabbard’s ODNI hosted an “urgent” meeting to discuss “new information on Russiagate” with members of the Justice Department and the President’s Intelligence Advisory Board.

All week, Washington buzzed with rumors about imminent document releases, but what came out wasn’t what many expected. Gabbard’s documents show the Obama White House overruling months of reports downplaying Russian interference and ordering subordinates to set a time bomb of manipulated intelligence, with the aim of trying to, as Gabbard described it, “usurp” an incoming president. No longer a tertiary character, Obama is now “center square” in the Russiagate scam, as one source put it.

Mainstream press outlets like the New York Times and Politico have already run pieces quoting Democratic Party mouthpieces shrugging off Gabbard’s reports as “baseless” and an attempt to “change the subject,” but coverage may not matter, as the investigation into the Trump-Russia hoax is no longer about trying to change hearts and minds. Multiple sources say Gabbard’s team is focused on “accountability” by gathering evidence for court-ready cases. The matter may soon need a special prosecutor, putting Obama in the same position Trump occupied in the first two years of his presidency, on the run from a high-profile fox hunt.

The information from Gabbard’s office was not the only news on the Russiagate front. This investigation is not just about “ten-year-old news,” as has been a common talking point, but may also involve never-reported Biden-era issues. A source close to the investigation said yesterday that the DOJ is focusing on conspiracy charges and looking at conduct “from 2016 to 2024.” Another with ties to the administration said “President Trump’s national security team is looking at evidence that members of his 2024 campaign were spied on as well.”

All of that is yet to be determined.

...

Not everyone in Trumpworld is thrilled with the new developments. The failure of senior intelligence officials who served in Trump’s last term to find and/or release these documents has a number of high profile figures upset. “So much corruption,” said one disgusted former Trump official. Another expressed skepticism that anything of significance would come of these investigations, and pointed to Special Counsel John Durham’s ill-fated probe: “It’s always something.” Thanks to the investigation kicked off by this ICA and the subsequent probe by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, there are people who went to jail, fell ill, went through family crises, and dealt with other serious problems. As a result, there are a lot of eyes on this investigation, and high expectations. Failure for Gabbard’s team to deliver real consequences would bring heavy criticism from both sides.

Gabbard’s team seems to understand they will be judged on the “accountability” question, and remain determined to continue. 

Subscribers can read Taibbi's full note here...

As we detailed earlier, Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, has declassified documents revealing "overwhelming evidence" showing how then-President Barack Obama and his national security team laid the groundwork for what would become the years-long Trump-Russia collusion investigation after President Trump won the 2016 election.

"This is surreal," says General Mike Flynn...

Via @DNIGabbard:

Americans will finally learn the truth about how in 2016, intelligence was politicized and weaponized by the most powerful people in the Obama Administration to lay the groundwork for what was essentially a years-long coup against President Trump, subverting the will of the American people and undermining our democratic republic.

Here’s how:

For months preceding the 2016 election, the Intelligence Community shared a consensus view: Russia lacked the intent and capability to hack U.S. elections.



But weeks after President Trump’s historic 2016 victory defeating Hillary Clinton, everything changed.

On Dec 8, 2016, IC officials prepared an assessment for the President's Daily Brief, finding that Russia "did not impact recent U.S. election results" by conducting cyber attacks on infrastructure.

Before it could reach the President, it was abruptly pulled “based on new guidance.” This key intelligence assessment was never published.

The next day, top national security officials including FBI Dir James Comey, CIA Dir John Brennan and DNI James Clapper gathered at the Obama White House to discuss Russia.

Obama directed the IC to create a new intelligence assessment that detailed Russian election meddling, even though it would contradict multiple intelligence assessments released over the previous several months.

Obama officials immediately leaned on their allies in the media to advance their falsehoods.

Anonymous IC sources leaked classified information to the Washington Post and others that Russia had intervened to hack the election in Trump's favor.

On January 6, 2017, just days before President Trump took office, DNI Clapper unveiled the Obama-directed politicized assessment, a gross weaponization of intelligence that laid the groundwork for a years-long coup intended to subvert President Trump’s entire presidency.

According to whistleblower emails shared with us today, we know Clapper and Brennan used the baseless discredited Steele Dossier as a source to push this false narrative in the intelligence assessment.

These documents detail a treasonous conspiracy by officials at the highest levels of the Obama White House to subvert the will of the American people and try to usurp the President from fulfilling his mandate

This betrayal concerns every American.

The integrity of our democratic republic demands that every person involved be investigated and brought to justice to prevent this from ever happening again. 

I am providing all documents to the Department of Justice to deliver the accountability that President Trump, his family, and the American people deserve.

You can read Tulsi's full press release (with links to all the supporting documents) here...

Distraction from Epstein or not... there's a lot here!

Sunday, July 20, 2025

The AI killer robot - A New Fear Unlocked

  This article is a follow-up to the previous one on information where I explained that killer robots should NOT be our primary fear. But of course they will! 

  Killer robots are so much more "real" and understandable than stupidification that they are almost irresistible for journalists and everyone else. 

  Soon, they will be ubiquitous on the battlefield as autonomous drones and supply vehicles. Soldiers will take longer to arrive. The police surprisingly may be easier to replace. Just look at what's going on in China. 

  The next generation of factories will be without humans. Farm equipment will become autonomous. It is just a matter of how much and how fast we can invest. Accidents will happen. A world optimized for machines is not ideal for human beings. 

  Luddites will raise the specter of killer robots so thoroughly described in SF movies without realizing that the real war has already started but the battlefield and weapon of choice is not lead and steel but energy and electricity!    

A New Fear Unlocked.

We all understand that mass adoption of humanoid robots is still years out. But the timeline is acceleratingbipedal, autonomous robots and so-called "robo-dogs" are already reaching early adopters. While mass adoption may still be years away, the affordability inflection point could arrive by the early 2030s—perhaps bringing us closer to the kind of household companion seen in Bicentennial Man, the late-1990s film starring Robin Williams. 

But warning signs around AI and humanoid robotics are already flashing yellow, with a hint of red. First, a recent study from AI research firm Anthropic warned advanced AI bots could be willing to harm humans to avoid being shut down or replaced. Second, investing legend Paul Tudor Jones issued a stark, apocalyptic warning about AI back in May. And now, in China, humanoid robots have gained the ability to recharge autonomously

According to the South China Morning Post, Chinese firm UBTech Robotics rolled out the Walker S2, the world's first humanoid robot capable of autonomously swapping its own batteries, allowing it to operate 24/7 without human assistance

This development underscores China's rapid progress in robotics, drones, AI, smartphones, semiconductors, and electric vehicles—technologies that often share similar production ecosystems. The nation that controls the development and supply chains of these technologies will dominate the 2030s. 

The emerging fear isn't just that China is becoming a "robotics powerhouse," as Moody's noted last week—but that its robots are now gaining the ability to operate autonomously and recharge themselves, edging closer to full independence from human control. With a mind of their own, there's no telling what these robots will do if one of them becomes rogue. Remember this...

Artificial Intelligence Breeds Mindless Inhumanity

  AI among other things is debasing the value of information. I agree as my experience is very close to Bruce Abramson below. Worse;  "We are rapidly entering a world in which widespread access to voluminous information is producing worse—not better—decisions and actions at all levels."

  The AI horse is out of the barn. We now understand that we won't control something which is smarter than us and consequently we must adapt, and fast. 

  Education will have to change. Work and even the concept of work will need to be transformed. Human relations will be altered when your virtual girlfriend or boyfriend is so much nicer that the real version. But the ultimate challenge is information and our ability to use it skillfully. 

  Information is amazingly like money in certain aspects: When it's free, you do not need to be careful with it and consequently will invest your efforts poorly. It is unavoidable. When everything became available at your fingertip with Google, we ended up with a generation who knew nothing at all; why bother? But with AI, we are one step further; Why "think" when you can outsource the thinking process to an AI and expect a better result? 

  Most people are already using AI as an "oracle" which AI experts adamantly warn us "it is not!" Soon, most, then all decisions will be AI assisted then AI based. Think autopilot on a plane. Insurance will be voided if the AI is turned off. By then, there will be AI and slow-I which will quickly fade out of the picture. But with it, wisdom will be gone too. We're on the verge of outsourcing our brains and our humanity. This to me is a far more realistic and dangerous outcome than the rise of the killer robot!  

Authored by Bruce Abramson via RealClearWire,

I began studying AI in the mid-1980s. Unusually for a computer scientist of that era, my interest was entirely in information, not in machines. I became obsessed with understanding what it meant to live during the transition from the late Industrial Age to the early Information Age.

What I learned is that computers fundamentally alter the economics of information.

We now have inexpensive access to more information, and to higher quality information, than ever before.

In theory, that should help individuals reach better decisions, organizations devise improved strategies, and governments craft superior policies. But that’s just a theory. Does it?

The answer is “sometimes.” Unfortunately, the “sometimes not” part of the equation is now poised to unleash devastating consequences.

Consider the altered economics of information: Scarcity creates value. That’s been true in all times, in all cultures, and for all resources. If there’s not enough of a resource to meet demand, its value increases. If demand is met and a surplus remains, value plummets.

Historically, information was scarce. Spies, lawyers, doctors, priests, scientists, scholars, accountants, teachers, and others spent years acquiring knowledge, then commanded a premium for their services.

Today, information is overabundant. No one need know anything because the trusty phones that never leave our sides can answer any question that might come our way. Why waste your time learning, studying, or internalizing information when you can just look it up on demand?

Having spent the past couple of years working in higher education reform and in conversation with college students, I’ve come to appreciate the power—and the danger—of this question. Today’s students have weaker general backgrounds than we’ve seen for many generations because when information ceased being scarce, it lost all value.

It’s important to recall how recently this phenomenon began. In 2011, an estimated one-third of Americans, and one-quarter of American teenagers, had smartphones. From there, adoption among the young grew faster than among the general population. Current estimates are that over 90 percent of Americans, and over 95 percent of teenagers, have smartphone access.

Even rules limiting classroom use cannot overcome the cultural shift. Few of today’s college students or recent grads have ever operated without the ability to scout ahead or query a device for information on an as-needed basis. There’s thus no reason for them to have ever developed the discipline or the practices that form the basis for learning.

The deeper problem, however, is that while instant lookup may work well for facts, it’s deadly for comprehension and worse for moral thinking.

A quick lookup can list every battle of WWII, along with casualty statistics and outcome. It cannot reveal the strategic or ethical deliberations driving the belligerents as they entered that battle. Nor can it explain why Churchill fought for the side of good while Hitler fought for the side of evil—a question that our most popular interviewers and podcasters have recently brought to prominence.

At least, lookup couldn’t provide such answers until recently. New AI systems—still less than three years old—are rushing to fill that gap. They already offer explanations and projections, at times including the motives underlying given decisions. They are beginning to push into moral judgments.

Of course, like all search and pattern-matching tools, these systems can only extrapolate from what they find. They thus tend to magnify whatever is popular. They’re also easy prey for some of the most basic cognitive biases. They tend to overweight the recent, the easily available, the widely repeated, and anything that confirms pre-conceived models.

The recent reports of Grok regurgitating crude antisemitic stereotypes and slogans illustrate the technological half of the problem. The shocking wave of terror-supporting actions wracking college campuses and drawing recent grads in many of our cities illustrate the human half.

The abundance of information has destroyed its value. Because information—facts and data—are the building blocks upon which all understanding must rest, we’ve raised a generation incapable of deep understanding. Because complex moral judgments build upon comprehension, young Americans are also shorn of basic morality

We are rapidly entering a world in which widespread access to voluminous information is producing worse—not better—decisions and actions at all levels. We have outsourced knowledge, comprehension, and judgment to sterile devices easily biased to magnify popular opinion. We have bred a generation of exquisitely credentialed, deeply immoral, anti-intellectuals on the brink of entering leadership.

When the ubiquity of instant lookup evolves beyond basic facts and into moral judgments, banal slogans and mindless cruelty will come to rule our lives.

Is there a way out of this morass? Perhaps the only one that the ancients discovered back when information, understanding, and morality all retained immense value: faith in a higher power. Because the path we’ve set on our own is heading into some very dark places.

Saturday, July 19, 2025

Governmental Self-Preservation: Why We’ll Never See The Real Epstein List

   Here's a profound and relatively balanced analysis of the Epstein debacle below. Trump is at war with the woke crowds and the Globalists and making some gains on a number of battlefronts. We get it, fair enough. He also cannot fight everybody at once less his administration is once again mired in bogs like the first one eight years ago. Again, understood. 

  But the Epstein affair has nothing to do with pedophilia and everything to do with global elites being remotely controlled by money, pressure and blackmail. Worse, Epstein is little more than the tip of the iceberg. From satanic rituals (not because these people believe in the occult but because of the leverage it gives you on "elected" officials.) pedophilia and other forbidden activities, a rather dark network of control is hovering over almost all Western institutions, placing only compromised men and women in position of power. This is the structure that 80 years of peace has given us.  

  The people get what they want: The illusion of getting back from the system more than they contribute while inflation is eating away their purchasing power and deficits accumulate robbing their children of future wealth (We have reached this point in Japan.) Meanwhile, a cabal of connected Globalists and deep state technocrats are forever in position of power and influence while guarantying that their children will inherit their position in a perfect system of nepotism. The exact opposite to what democracy was supposed to achieve. Let's not ask Barron Trump, or anybody else really, how they plan to reform such a society! Anyone co-opted to the elite will automatically adjust their behavior to belong. Such is human nature. It is the institutions that need to be rot resistant, not foible individuals.   

Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.us

If there’s one characteristic that defines Donald Trump it’s his habit of switching his positions on a dime – Leaving many a critic looking rather foolish when they establish an argument against him today, only to discover he mostly agrees with them tomorrow. I’ve learned it’s best to wait a little while before commenting on the man’s policy decisions and allow time for the debate to ferment. After months of deflection and now retraction, the Jeffery Epstein controversy has turned especially ripe.

To understand the chaos surrounding the Epstein issue we have to first recognize that it’s the product of an inherent division within the MAGA movement that needs to be addressed. The campaign to support Trump is built on two groups that intersect but don’t always agree:

1) Average Republicans (and some moderates) who are most concerned with defeating the agenda of leftists and keeping woke activists out of government power.

2) Hardcore conservatives and libertarians from the “conspiracy” end of the movement who are most concerned with defeating the globalist cabal.

I find myself in rooted in both camps and I see both as essential, though it’s clear to me that the goals of the second group are ultimately more important.

To be clear, leftist saboteurs are a legitimate enemy that has been employed as a weapon against the rest of the populace. I’m growing especially tired of the laziness of libertarians who cry “False left/right paradigm!” while forgetting the living hell we all experienced under the reign of Joe Biden and Democrats. The differences between conservatives and leftists cannot be denied.

The country has at least been tolerable under Trump – No more “transing” or grooming of children in schools. No more pride month. No more pandering to DEI. No more open borders. No more federal accusations of conservatives being “terrorists” and a “danger to democracy”. If you can’t at least give some credit for these changes then you’re not a serious person and I have no time for you.

That said, in the end the threat of the political left pales in comparison to the threat presented by the globalists. These are people with a luciferian ideology of self worship and moral relativism and they are in positions of immense power (at least in financial terms). Though their political reputation in the US is faltering, they still have near total control of the narratives in Europe, Australia and Canada, not to mention invasive financial influence throughout most of the world.

Look at it this way: Have you ever heard of a globalist being punished or arrested for their attempts to manipulate and corrupt the social and governmental institutions of any given nation? How many globalist NGOs have been shut down in recent memory? Isn’t the US still pouring tax dollars into globalist institutions like the IMF, BIS (through the Federal Reserve), World Bank, etc.?

Political factions may battle for the minds of the masses and many times these fights are very real, but the globalists always remain in the background watching and waiting for another chance to push civilization further towards their dystopian vision. They don’t care what happens politically as long as their money and influence remain intact. No one ever aims their cannons at the whispering men lurking behind the curtain.

For conservative patriots, dealing with the evils of the political left serves the immediate purpose of treating symptoms, but not the disease. Globalists are a parasitic organism that feeds on humanity, spawning more and more decline and despair as they grow. They must be eliminated from the equation if our future is to ever improve.

Trump has openly admonished the globalists on many occasions and he ran his 2016 and 2024 campaigns on reversing the economic damage they have done. Defeating globalism was a big part of his election platform, it’s undeniable. The problem is, he has consistently backed away from any direct prosecution or punishment of said devils.

Trump stated succinctly in 2024 that he would release the Epstein list, and he now refuses. The haphazard dismissal of the Epstein files despite the embarrassing controversy is a reality check for the conspiracy subset. For the anti-globalist portion of MAGA, especially libertarians and conservative Christians, you have been given notice; Trump is not your gladiator or your savior. He’s not going to fulfill your dreams of government reform, nor is he going to bring the hammer down on the elites.

I warned back in May in my article ‘The Trump Administration’s Biggest Wins And Biggest Fails So Far’ that his handling of the Epstein case was an epic blunder. I noted:

All we want is a concise list of who engaged with Epstein and his “services”. These people need to be called out and brought to justice NOW. If they are in government they need to be removed ASAP. There is no room for pedos in American leadership anymore.

I can understand certain obstacles, such as keeping victims protected. An outright dump of info would be reckless, not to mention illegal. That said, the feds have had years to go over this evidence. I suspect that the White House is stalling because the client list could destroy a large portion of the government. The number of leaders exposed must be extensive enough that a release of the list would cripple the system. It’s the only explanation that makes sense for why they continue to keep the American people waiting…”

For those seeking answers as to why Trump is running away from the Epstein client list like it’s a nuclear bomb, it’s because it IS a nuclear bomb. I continue to hold that the list is pure poison for the existing government and that its release would be so detrimental it would trigger the collapse of the US system and create a cataclysmic domino effect around the world.

It’s so dangerous, in fact, that Trump is now asserting it “doesn’t exist” or that it’s a “Democrat conspiracy” with files manipulated by Democrats before Biden left office. There’s no explanation as to what Trump means by this other than he seems to be saying the existing evidence is fabricated.

Epstein was arrested for child trafficking. He conveniently died “by suicide” before going to trial (psychopathic personalities like Epstein rarely kill themselves) nullifying any court discovery and public release of his files. Numerous victims have come forward, but we’re supposed to believe that there were no clients?  Or, that Epstein never kept a list of those clients? It’s pure stupidity.

The Trump Administration admits to obtaining an endless array of videos featuring minor victims. The question is simple: WHO is in those videos abusing those young girls (or boys)? It’s not that difficult to understand – WE WANT THE NAMES, and we’re never going to stop demanding those names.

But lets not fool ourselves, we’re not going to get our hands on the real, unredacted list. Why? Because some of the most powerful people in the world are on that register and pedophilia is still an unforgivable sin in the eyes of the west. Proof of a mass conspiracy of wealthy pedos and political diddlers is one of the few things that would inspire the public to actually pick up torches and pitchforks and burn Washington DC to the ground.

It’s not a coincidence that woke activists and NGOs have sought to normalize pedophilia through trans propaganda. Globalists eventually want to turn the crime into a social issue; labeling it a matter of “sexual preference” protected by inclusion ideology so they can pursue their disgusting fetish with impunity.

Though leftists have intricate arguments as to why children should be allowed to legally “consent”, the act of pedophilia is still considered worthy of long term imprisonment, castration and even death. No normal person is convinced by the “consent” theory.

Meaning, if a sweeping list is produced that includes the names of government officials, those officials would be dealt with by someone even if they never face prosecution. Trust in government would plummet. The normal functions of American institutions would cease. The country would collapse.

Could this calamity be managed? Possibly, but I don’t think any political leader including Trump wants to to take responsibility for the repercussions. Some say that Trump is on the list – Obviously he knew Epstein as did most people in the upper echelons of society. Epstein made a point to slither into every wealthy circle he could find.

Trump did reportedly kick the guy out of Mar-a-Lago after finding out he made a pass at the underage daughter of an associate. If Trump is on the list then there must be extensive blackmail evidence – So, why didn’t Democrats ever release it?  Democrats had four years to flood the media with information (real or fake) on the Epstein case and they did absolutely nothing. No, I think Trump is withholding the list because it’s a weapon of mass destruction, not because he’s on it.

Everyone expected the Dems to suppress the list. No one expected them to do the right thing. People are fuming about Trump because they had high hopes.  They expected him to damn the torpedoes and release the files regardless of the aftermath.

I’m here to tell you, government will ALWAYS protect itself first. It’s not an excuse, it’s just a fact.

You’re probably familiar with the concept of the “thin blue line”; the assertion that police act as the only barrier between order and mayhem in American society. The notion has been criticized as elitist and fundamentally untrue. Cops rarely stop crimes in progress and only clean up the mess afterwards, leaving most Americans to protect themselves.

But one could argue that the mere existence of law enforcement as an institution acts as a deterrent to societal decay. And, in the past this idea of the “greater good” has led LEOs to protect each other from prosecution rather than pursue the ugly truth about their brothers in arms.

I think that many people within government also see themselves as a “thin line” of protection; a morally gray barrier between civilization and annihilation. A line between order and anarchy. I think they view their mandate as sacrosanct and that the ends always justify the means.

There’s a large percentage of the normal population that is also willing to overlook the Epstein debacle if it means defeating the chaos of the woke revolution. Recent polls show Trump’s overall approval rating among Republicans actually INCREASED after his handling of the Epstein issue, even though a majority of people in polls also believe the case is being covered up.  There’s a lot of us that will continue to call attention to the client list, but don’t doubt for a second that many other people will forget and move on within weeks.

Again, the anti-globalists need to accept the reality that they have limited influence within MAGA. Plenty of people care about libertarian economic theory, the Bildergberg Group, Davos, CBDCs, foreign aid to Israel and cults of ultra-rich luciferian pedos, but not enough people to make any of these things a popular priority. The deeper agenda of globalist control is barely on their peripheral radar, or they don’t take it seriously enough to worry about it over their morning coffee.

Could Trump suddenly change his stance and unleash a torrent of files tomorrow?  Like I said in the beginning, he switches positions on a dime, but it will be hard for him to go back on his claims that the client list represents a "hoax".  I am doubtful we'll see an uncensored version of the list and even more doubtful that anyone will be prosecuted.

Trump is certainly pulling America back from leftist extremism (that’s a good thing), but he has no intention of going to war with the globalists (that’s a bad thing). As I have noted over and over again, if liberty proponents want to get rid of the cabal they will have to stop waiting for political solutions that will never materialize. The war to unseat the globalists will not be fought by MAGA. The eternal mandate of the political edifice is self preservation, and Trump is part of that edifice.

"Should Putin NUKE Ukraine?" by Martin Armstrong (Video - 1h15mn)

   A dose of Martin Armstrong on the Burning Platform below as a departure gift.    The Burning Platform has good stuff and a lot of junk to...