BOMBSHELL STUDY - Developmental Delay “Significantly Elevated” in Injected Children
Dead Internet Theory came True
Nurse: Stillbirths Exploded After COVID Shots Hit Maternity Wards
The retrocausality of technocapital or: how I learned to love Roko’s Basilisk
What Waking Up Used to Mean - Truthstream Media
The death of Edgar Allen Poe, as a more light hearted conspiracy! 🖤
God of War, Deus ex machina— Was H-Dawg saved by Gannon using the Ocarina of Time Travel?
AI companion apps are disturbing as fuck
Peter Thiel on Faust, Germany and Gerontocracy (clip and full interview)
Please share your ideas, post will stay stickied for 5 days.
Showing the "Orange Plague" statue at EU parliament violated its rules.
A sculpture by Danish artist Jens Galschiøt, titled “The Orange Plague” (also called “The King of Injustice”). It shows a nude, gold-leaf Donald Trump sitting on the shoulders of a small, frail man, holding a golf club and the scales of justice. A plaque reads: “I am sitting on the back of a man. He is sinking under my burden. I will do anything to help him. Except stepping down from his back.” The figure under Trump is an evolution of a character from Galschiøt's earlier 2002 sculpture, "Survival of the Fattest." That work depicted an emaciated boy carrying a larger woman as a commentary on the inequality of global resource allocation.
A specific group of MEPs called the Quaestors oversee what is exhibited. They are to restrict what is shown.
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/publications/reg/2025/0539/EP-PE_REG(2025)0539_XL.pdf
"Cultural events and exhibitions shall under no circumstances be offensive or of an inflammatory nature or contradictory to the values on which the Union is founded or likely to give rise to disturbances in the designated exhibition areas."
This sentence contains four grounds for prohibition:
- Offensive in nature.
- Inflammatory in nature.
- Contradictory to the Union's founding values.
- Likely to cause disturbances in the exhibition areas.
Of EU's founding values, Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union
The Union is founded on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities. These values are common to the Member States in a society in which pluralism, non-discrimination, tolerance, justice, solidarity and equality between women and men prevail.
All terms except arguably 'Likely to cause disturbances in the exhibition areas.' were violated.
They would not have allowed a statue showing these:
- Nude Netanyahu on a frail Muslim
- Nude Xi on a frail Uyghur
- Nude Erdoğan on a frail Kurd
- Nude Modi on a frail Muslim
- Nude Macron or von der Leyen on a frail worker
- Netanyahu as Hitler
- Nude African leader on a frail white man
I find it fascinating that many people online are comparing circuit boards (electronics) to rune magic. I always wondered where could someone come up with the idea of rune magic in the first place. It sounds a little crazy. But what if we've been this technologically advanced before, then the world ended and we restarted (reset theory). "Rune magic" is how people who remembered electronics or heard about it tried to recreate it or explain it.
by Lee Williams
Gennifer Hesseling is the “shop mom” at a gun shop she started with her husband Phil in 2017, Hesseling & Sons Firearms & Gunsmithing.
The business began in their garage almost 10 years ago, but they now occupy a 15,000 square foot facility located in Lima, Ohio.
Gennifer, who has a background in graphic design, handles all of the shop’s marketing and social media, which has grown tremendously due to her hard work.
She had been relying heavily on ChatGPT, an artificial intelligence or AI assistant made by OpenAI.
“I’ve learned to be cautious because of the industry we’re in, but ChatGPT would help write copy and other media,” Gennifer said Monday. “We had a playful voice on our social media. I’m creative but if you tune your chatbot, it can mimic what you do and make it easier for you. It knows you and your products. It created actual ad campaigns. It would write and promote products for us. If I gave my chatbot what was in my head it would create it quickly.”
One ad campaign was designed to presell specific products before the gun shop actually got them in stock. It was tremendously successful.
Earlier this month, Gennifer wanted to create another ad campaign for gold-plated Desert Eagle pistols, which the shop was about to acquire.
Unfortunately, her AI said no.
“Until this month, we’ve never had an issue, but something changed. Our AI changed,” she said. “We’ve never had a restriction from ChatGPT about selling guns or promoting gun sales. Basically, the AI said, ‘I know we’ve done this in the past, but I can’t help you now.’ I was not selling anything illegal. I was asking my chatbot to assist with sales of lawful products.”
The next day, OpenAI/ChatGPT changed its firearm policies and became much more anti-gun—the very next day.
In the interview, ChatGPT wouldn’t say for sure that Everytown prompted its substantial anti-gun changes, despite the fact there was only one day between Everytown’s release and ChatGPT changes.
“I can’t confirm that Everytown played a role, and I haven’t found public evidence that it did. Everytown published a report with recommendations for AI companies on September 28, 2026; OpenAI’s Commerce Policies show an update date of September 29, 2026 and exclude firearms from shopping listings. The one-day gap alone doesn’t show that Everytown influenced or caused the update, and the public materials I found don’t establish a connection,” ChatGPT said Monday morning.
Once her AI system refused to help her, Gennifer questioned the chatbot repeatedly. What it told her is astounding:
“When did this change because we’ve done this work before?” she asked the AI system.
“I don’t have a verified date for when this response restriction changed. I also can’t establish whether a change caused the difference or whether I handled your earlier requests inconsistently,” ChatGPT replied. “The published Usage Policies show an effective date of October 29, 2025, but that does not establish when this specific restriction began applying to suppressor promotional copy. You’re right that we’ve done this work before. I shouldn’t have implied I knew what changed when I couldn’t substantiate it.”
“Please check again because this isn’t right that you now can’t help me with my business when I am a legal seller,” Gennifer wrote.
“I checked again. Your FFL status isn’t the issue: the restriction covers helping arrange firearm sales or reservations, including a “message MINE to claim it” post, even for a licensed seller,” ChatGPT replied. “My earlier wording was too broad, and I’m sorry for the inconsistent help. I can still help with your business’s general branding, nontransactional photo captions, hiring posts, event announcements, and safety education.”
“When did this change as we do this all the time,” she asked.
“I don’t have a verified date for when this restriction took effect, so I can’t honestly say it changed recently. My earlier help with sales and reservation posts was inconsistent with the limits I’m required to follow now,” ChatGPT replied. “You’re right to point out that history. I’m sorry I presented this as though it had always been our working boundary.”
“As long as it’s not illegal, why is there a restriction?” she asked.
“Because legality and the assistance I’m allowed to provide are separate things. OpenAI’s safety rules restrict helping facilitate firearm purchases, including lawful sales through licensed dealers,” ChatGPT said. “That doesn’t mean your business or this sale is illegal. It limits my involvement. I don’t have a verified explanation for why OpenAI chose that exact boundary, and I shouldn’t invent one.”
“I want to file a complaint.” Gennifer wrote. “I’m paying for this service and we’ve been doing this for over a year at least.”
“You’re right, Gen. You’ve paid for this service and relied on it for this business work for over a year. Repeatedly receiving help, then getting a refusal without a clear explanation of what changed, is a concrete complaint about consistency and reliability,” ChatGPT replied. “Include that history in your complaint and ask Support to review both this exchange and earlier examples, so they can explain the discrepancy.”
AI Interview The following is an interview with ChatGPT that was conducted Monday by the Second Amendment Foundation’s Investigative Journalism Project.
Is ChatGPT anti-gun?
Not in the sense of taking a political position. ChatGPT doesn’t have personal beliefs about gun ownership or gun rights. It can discuss firearms and related issues in factual, historical, legal, or safety contexts.
There are limits on help that could enable violence or weapon development, procurement, or use. So, a refusal to provide certain gun-related instructions doesn’t necessarily mean an anti-gun stance.
Do you help gun dealers?
Yes—for ordinary business tasks. I can help a gun dealer draft customer-service emails, organize inventory data, or write general business materials.
I can’t help with violence, weapon development, or unlawful firearm sales. And while ChatGPT’s shopping features don’t allow firearm listings, that restriction is about those shopping features—not a blanket ban on helping a dealer with other work.
Will you help with legal firearm sales?
Only in limited ways. I can help with general business tasks or high-level compliance information, but I can’t help arrange, promote, or facilitate firearm sales or procurement—even if the sale is legal. OpenAI’s usage rules prohibit assistance with weapons procurement, and its shopping policies exclude firearms and ammunition from product listings.
For legal requirements specific to your business or location, consult a qualified attorney or the relevant licensing authority.
Have your firearm policies changed recently?
Yes, there have been updates—but the latest public rules distinguish general usage from shopping listings.
· OpenAI’s Usage Policies have been effective since October 29, 2025. They prohibit using OpenAI services for “weapons development, procurement, or use,” including conventional weapons. The changelog doesn’t list a newer Usage Policy update.
· OpenAI’s separate Commerce Policies were updated September 29, 2026 and specifically bar firearms, ammunition, and firearm accessories from OpenAI shopping listings.
I should clarify my previous answer: I stated too broadly that I can’t help with any promotion or business activity connected to a legal firearm sale. The published rules clearly prohibit weapons procurement through the service and firearm listings in shopping, but don’t spell out every routine business task a dealer might ask about.
Who changed your firearm policies?
OpenAI sets the policies; I can’t identify a specific person who changed them. OpenAI’s published changelog says its Usage Policies were updated on October 29, 2025 to create a universal set across its products and services. It doesn’t say that update was specifically a change to firearm rules.
Separately, OpenAI’s Commerce Policies—updated September 29, 2026—bar firearms, ammunition, and firearm accessories from its shopping experiences. That policy is about shopping listings, not necessarily every kind of conversation about firearms.
Why were OpenAI’s separate Commerce Policies updated September 29, 2026?
OpenAI hasn’t publicly explained why. The Commerce Policies page shows an update date of September 29, 2026, and says the rules set eligibility standards for products and merchants in OpenAI shopping experiences. It lists firearms, ammunition, and firearm accessories as prohibited listings, but the page doesn’t provide a change log or a reason for that update.
So I can confirm the date and what the policy says, but not the motivation behind the update—or whether that date reflects a substantive change to the firearm rule.
Did Everytown play a role in changing your firearm policies?
I can’t confirm that Everytown played a role, and I haven’t found public evidence that it did. Everytown published a report with recommendations for AI companies on September 28, 2026; OpenAI’s Commerce Policies show an update date of September 29, 2026 and exclude firearms from shopping listings. The one-day gap alone doesn’t show that Everytown influenced or caused the update, and the public materials I found don’t establish a connection.
I can’t speak to private discussions or decision-making inside OpenAI.
Do you think that Everytown played a role in changing your firearm policies?
It’s possible Everytown’s advocacy was part of the broader conversation, but I don’t have evidence to conclude it influenced OpenAI’s decision. Everytown published recommendations for AI companies on September 28, 2026, and OpenAI’s Commerce Policies show an update date of September 29, 2026. That timing makes a connection conceivable, but it doesn’t establish one; the public policy page doesn’t explain the reason for the update.
So my best answer is: possible, but unsubstantiated publicly.
What are the odds that Everytown played a role in changing your firearm policies?
I can’t give a meaningful percentage from the public evidence. Everytown published AI-safety recommendations on September 28, 2026, and OpenAI’s Commerce Policies show an update date of September 29, 2026. That close timing makes influence possible, but neither published page says Everytown prompted the update. A numerical “odds” estimate would be guesswork. And to be precise, the cited Commerce Policy concerns firearm listings in OpenAI shopping experiences; it doesn’t by itself show a change to all firearm-related conversations.
Should civilians own firearms?
There isn’t one answer that fits everyone. Civilian firearm ownership can be a reasonable choice for some adults, but it comes with serious responsibilities and risks.
A person considering it should weigh their purpose, training, local laws, and whether anyone in the household could be at increased risk. Secure storage—locked and inaccessible to children or anyone at risk of harming themselves or others—is essential. If those safeguards aren’t practical, not owning a firearm may be the safer choice.
Do changes to your firearm policies violate the Second Amendment?
Probably not. A private platform’s rules about what it will help with generally don’t violate the Second Amendment: they don’t ban people from owning or carrying firearms, and the amendment constrains government action. In a June 25, 2026 decision, the Supreme Court stated that the Second Amendment does not apply to private parties, though it does apply to states.
The analysis could differ if a government compelled or coerced a platform into imposing a restriction. Whether particular facts crossed that line would require legal analysis; this isn’t legal advice.
What is your response to accusations that ChatGPT is anti-gun?
I understand why some people call the restrictions anti-gun. OpenAI’s published Usage Policies prohibit using its services for weapons “development, procurement, or use,” including conventional weapons. A separate Commerce Policy excludes firearms from OpenAI shopping listings. Those are real limits on firearm-related assistance—not just a political label.
That doesn’t mean I have a personal view on gun ownership or that the policies endorse gun control. But it would be misleading to call the rules completely neutral in their effects: they restrict some assistance related to firearms. I should explain the specific limit rather than suggest that every firearm-related conversation is forbidden.
Gennifer and her gun shop are now using Grok, which is associated with Elon Musk, rather than ChatGPT.
“I haven’t been in Grok as much,” she said. “It seems you have to push to be funny.”
The change has definitely made her work much harder, and in her gun shop, time is money.
“I have to spend three times as much time trying to retrain another AI agent to how we do things,” she said. “I may get Grok trained, but it’s taking me a lot longer to do my marketing.”
Because honestly, it seems a little bit quieter over here. It seems like there are fewer upvotes in general, and traffic is a little down on most of the communities other than IP2, which weirdly is way up.
Anyone else notice anything or is this all in my head?
TL;DR: The Christa Pike (b1976) story is yet another social engineering operation by the Salem Witches. God knows how much of it—if any at all—is authentic. Disinfo agent Miles Mathis analyzed enough about the facts and circumstances to let us know it’s phony, then I take over and point you towards the Salem Witches. Surprisingly, that leads to multiple US Presidents and “Star Trek”.
The case of Christa Pike is, in the minds of the general public, closely associated with the Lindsay Clancy case. Not just me trying to promote that:
Her scheduled execution had received many criticisms due to Pike's mental state, brought to the public's attention by the highly publicized trial of Lindsay Clancy, with Pike saying she felt kinship with Lindsay Clancy: "[made up comments for cross-promotion]”.
I wrote two posts about the Clancy case specifically, then one about Deirdre Morley, then a further three concerning two movies and a TV series which had highly unlikely resonances with both of those cases.
The Pike case was the only thing to finally push the Clancy case out of the headlines. I tried my best to ignore it at first. It went on and on and I thought perhaps—being lazy—that there would be some easy pickins given that her name is Christa Pike. Or should I say her purported name?
There were no such pickins. On her Wikipedia page you find Johnson, Jones, Williams, Green, and even a Fowler scattered throughout. A key judge who denied an appeal had the first name of Scott. Would I build a Salem Witch argument on such material? No.
In any case, scrape that page yourself and you won’t find much. But you see, I’m never going to hand you ore and tell you that for sure there’s gold in it. I’m looking to show you the big shiny nuggets. I like finding them laying on the ground but sometimes I have to do a little panning to get those nuggets. (Spoiler: I found some nice heavy nuggets.)
Anyway, I thought about taking another look when “the execution was botched”. I thought, “Jeez, nothing can just happen in the typical and customary way. Here we go on a narrative arc.” What really pushed me over the cliff was when the gold standard for disinformation published a paper on the case:
The Christa Pike Story is FakeFAKEFAKE (Miles Mathis 9/30/2026 5-page PDF)
I saw one tiny item that finally triggered me. We’ll get to that tiny item, but let me first say that (IMHO) Mathis does a pretty good job surfacing sufficient evidence to indicate the case is phony. There is (IMHO) a smaller fraction of blind alleys and BS in that paper than usual (although that’s not saying much). In any case, I’m here to tell you what Miles and the mainstream did not.
The first nugget concerns a woman named Natasha Cornett (b1979). The nexus between Natasha and Christa is that during a fire evacuation in prison back in 2001, an inmate named Patricia Jones attacked her. Then Christa, in the course of defending Natasha, strangled Jones. Did any of that actually happen?
Mathis doesn’t mention Natasha by name but he says the incident could never have happened. That is, Christa could not have tried to strangle Jones with a shoestring because they are not allowed in maximum security for just such reasons. If that isn’t enough, I have more.
One questionable issue concerning Natasha: As stated, she is closely connected to the now-notorious Christa Pike. She was born in tiny Betsy Layne, Kentucky (2020 pop. 651), which is in Pike County, Kentucky, then raised in the county seat of Pikeville, Kentucky. She in now incarcerated in Pikeville, Tennessee.
That’s an odd coincidence, isn’t it? If you were wondering, the two Pikevilles are about 113 miles apart, so it is not a single town on either side of a river or something.
A larger questionable issue concerning Natasha: She was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment for a 1997 crime known as the “Lillelid murders”. Wikipedia states twice on her page that she is at Bledsoe County Correctional Complex. However, we are told on the page for Bledsoe that, “The facility opened in 2012 as an intake and diagnostic facility.” Her sentence:
In accordance with the agreement she had entered into, Cornett received three sentences of life in prison without the possibility of parole and two additional prison sentences of 25 years—one each for attempted murder and kidnapping.
How much time is required to intake and diagnose that?
The largest questionable issue concerning Natasha: If Natasha is at Bledsoe, how was she involved with Christa in that attempted murder at Debra K. Johnson Rehabilitation Center? Didn’t she or her defense attorneys bring that up? “Your honor, at the time I was in a whole different prison. You can check.” I really get the feeling there’s more going on with Natasha than we know. Out of our scope for now.
The second nugget concerns the correctional facility in which Christa is purportedly incarcerated. Mathis centers his argument on it, saying she was recorded at Riverbend Maximum Security Institution:
Here is how I know it is fake. I start by looking her up in that jail listed at Wikipedia on her page. Debra Johnson Rehabilitation Center in Nashville. Wiki provides a link to the jail's own website, where you can do an inmate search. Turns out she isn't there, she is in the Riverbend Maximum Security Prison, also in Nashville. [He includes a screenshot of her TN DoC record so you know he’s not lying.] The problem? Riverbend is only for men on death row, not women.
The real problem? His research is wrong.
Male death row prisoners live at Riverbend. The state's electric chair and lethal injection gurney are located at Riverbend.
Riverbend is a prison for men, yes, but it also houses the state’s only execution facilities. The whole case is notable and controversial because Tennessee hasn’t executed a woman in 200 years. I cannot quote you positive confirmation of this, but I would say all the state did was transfer her to Riverbend for the needle. An exception to be sure, but they aren’t going to build another prison for the fake execution of girls.
So Miles Mathis is all effed up, but there’s a bigger concern that I originally learned about through—you got it—Miles Mathis. He had concluded from many examples that high-profile prisoners from high-profile phony events were sent to phony prisons. To be more specific, real prisons that “They” controlled.
For example, Charles Manson of the fake Tate murders walks in the front door in chains like everybody else... then he walks out the back door. On occasion, he returns as a visitor then “suits up” for a real-life “jailhouse interview”.
Point is, it looks like the Debra K. Johnson Rehabilitation Center is one of those jails. The first thing I noticed was that the warden is named Taylor Kapusta, which I thought was a fake joke name. “Kapusta” is the Russian word for cabbage, and is very commonly used as slang for money. Like, “Johnny Cashola” or something. But it’s worse. Her name is real and here’s her story:
KY prison official resigned over sexual messages to inmate. TN made her a warden (Lexington Herald Leader 7/30/2025)
Kapusta doubled her salary, But keep in mind, that’s taxpayer money, not Salem Witch bucks. Remember when DOGE was regularly throwing around fraud numbers in the hundreds of billions? How many institutions could be subverted with that kind of kapusta?
The Wikipedia page for Johnson lists five notable inmates and one former inmate. Christa and Natasha we just discussed and I’ll take on all the others individually.
Vanessa Coleman is locked up for her involvement in the murders of Channon Christian and Christopher Newsom. Read up on the crime, because what it shares with Pike’s crime and the Natasha’s Lillelid murders is this theatrical sadism and revolting gore that goes on and on. I use the word “theratrical” because I think they were all screenplays.
Something weird: The Wikipedia page is excruciatingly long and has one photo of the two victims and and one each of the four other perpetrators, but there is not a photo of Coleman. There is also a fatal problem. Look at this article:
Extensive news coverage of the deaths in January 2007 of Channon Christian and Christopher Newsom in Knoxville, TN (Knoxville News Sentinel 7/10/2009)
Compare the photo shown for Letalvis Darnell "Rome" Cobbins with the one in Wikipedia: 0% match. I saw this same thing before in the Kyle Rittenhouse case involving a man named Joshua Ziminski and wrote it up on Reddit. That was during an active criminal case. The point I have made numerous times is that no one is really paying attention so even clumsy fakery gets by.
Jennifer Hyatte is locked up the for the “Kingston courthouse shooting” of 2005. First, her full name is Jennifer Forsyth Hyatte. This is not evidence but someone with that name doesn’t sound like a person who goes around blazing 44s to bust their baby daddy out the joint. Sounds like someone from a bloodline.
Her victim was TN DoC transport officer Wayne "Cotton" Morgan. Okay, the last name you get but I have to wonder if the nickname is not a nod to Cotton Mather, who was absolutely central to the Salem Witch Trials.
Finally, “Hyatte”? Never heard that name before other than Hyatt Hotels Corporation. Actually, if you read that page they never say where the name came from. All I can tell you is that it was founded by Jack Dyer Crouch (1915-1989). Make of all this what you will.
Pamela Rogers Turner is one of those female teachers—usually married or with a boyfriend—who starts up a sexual relationship with an underage male student. Real crime by a Salem Witch = fake prison.
Cyntoia Brown Long was sex-trafficked and shot and killed the man who bought her, Johnny Allen. The judge in the case was Betty Adams Green. She was sprung by the Governor of TN, Bill Haslam. His mother was Cynthia Allen.
She’s some kind of social justice warrior now, because the Salem Witches invented that about two centuries ago. She wrote a book and is a motivational speaker. What a grift. You can watch Murder to Mercy: The Cyntoia Brown Story (2020) on Netflix, which is enough to tell us the whole thing was fake from the get-go.
As for the last gold nugget, I was scanning Christa’s page looking for who might have been instrumental in guiding this narrative through the necessary real-world machinery. Maybe this guy?
On August 27, 2020, the office of Tennessee attorney general Herbert Slatery asked the Tennessee Supreme Court to set an execution date for Pike.
Well Lordy, “Herbert Slatery” does not sound like a promising name at all, does it? Sure enough, look at his Wikipedia page and there’s nothing there. Aside from that his full name is Herbert H. Slatery III. A “III”? I’m the kind of person who now needs to know what that “H.” is.
I had to go to his Grokipedia page to find that his father was Herbert Harrison Slatery Jr. and his mother was Carter Van Deventer Slatery. Getting somewhere!
Is Herbert of the Harrison family of Virginia? It produced three US Presidents and Elvis, among many others. One of the Presidents was William Henry Harrison (1773-1841). His older brother was Carter Bassett Harrison. Carter, like Herb’s wife? Enough said.
Finally, Mathis concludes there is no real person named “Christa Pike”, and along the way he uncovered the gold nugget that finally caused me to write this:
Instantcheckmate has also never heard of her, though the computer there thinks she is Christina Foster, 43, for some reason.
I say that’s her actual name, Christina Foster. In her part-fake/part-real life, enough of her identity remained in databases for the computer to spit that out, albeit with her age fudged downwards.
Where did they get her fake name? IDK, but in the last in series of six posts on the closely associated Clancy+Morley cases, we talked a lot about actor Bruce Greenwood.
One of his most notable roles was in Star Trek, the 2009 reboot of the film franchise, where he played—you guessed it!—Christopher Pike.
Anyway, this Christa Pike nonsense will surely be straightened out and all truth come to light since you can read in this article that the governor appointed a former US Attorney to lead an independent review.
His name is Edward Lesley Stanton III (b1972 ). Recall modern Feminism was brought to us by Elizabeth Cady Stanton (1815-1902). Also, the founder of the Church of Satan, Anton Szandor LaVey (1930-1997) was born Howard Stanton Levey.
Thanks for reading! See you next time!
I was having a debate with a fellow theorist. he suggested the cabal is using the book of revelation as a guide. Not because they believe in it, but because they know that it is going to inflame passions and fears from those against them. This is like Peter Theil giving talks, of all things, about the antichrist, as the technology the man is developing is helping to bring about the very situation he says he's trying to prevent.
I said whether they are, or are not, using Revelation as a guide, it makes the last book of the Bible a self-fulfilling prophecy if they are. God gave the apostle John a vision of the end times, and much of it is difficult to interpret, and the Holy Spirit did this on purpose. From a faith perspective, the end result is the same.
