Rabbinical Control of the Jews

 It was only recently that I realised how profoundly the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem in 70 AD increased the control that rabbis had over their congregations.

What does the source (E. Michael Jones' "The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit") say about the Jewish revolt of 70 AD?

The Jewish revolt that culminated in the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple in 70 AD was initially sparked in 66 AD when the Roman ruler Florus used a small riot as a pretext to loot the Temple. According to the historian Josephus, this suicidal war was chiefly driven by the Jews' ardent belief in the imminent arrival of a messianic king who would deliver them from Roman oppression and grant Israel dominion over the earth.

The Outbreak of the Revolt The Jewish population was divided between the Zealots and a peace party. After the peace party's attempts to urge compliance with Rome failed, the revolutionaries gained the upper hand, and the Jewish people refused to pay taxes to Rome. The Zealot leader Menahem captured the fortress of Masada, while Eleazar persuaded Jewish priests to stop offering the daily sacrifice for the emperor Nero, officially committing the Temple to the insurrection. After terrorist factions like the Sicarii slaughtered Roman garrisons and the Jewish forces defeated the Roman general Cestius, Jerusalem was temporarily liberated.

The Roman Siege and the Fall of Jerusalem Recognizing the threat, the Emperor Nero dispatched his able general Vespasian, who cautiously starved out the rebels one fortress at a time rather than engaging them in open battle. In February 70 AD, Vespasian's son Titus appeared before Jerusalem and initially offered leniency. When the Jews refused, Titus resorted to extreme cruelty, crucifying 500 prisoners in a single day and sending others back with their hands cut off. The Jewish forces, led by John of Gischala, retreated to the Temple and set fire to their own buildings to hold off the Romans. In August 70 AD, a Roman soldier threw a flaming torch into the sanctuary, setting the Temple ablaze. Titus ordered the instant execution of the surviving priests, and the second Temple fell on the very anniversary of the destruction of the first Temple.

Aftermath and the Birth of Rabbinic Judaism The human toll of the siege was staggering, with more than a million lives lost. Within two months, Titus leveled the city's walls, and the surviving Jews were sold into slavery at prices so low that the market collapsed. The Jewish warrior Simon bar Giora was dragged through Rome and thrown from the Tarpeian rock.

The destruction of the Temple created a profound religious crisis, as the Jews were left with no Temple, no priesthood, and no sacrifices to fulfill their covenant. However, Jochanan ben Zakkai, a leader of the peace party who had himself smuggled out of besieged Jerusalem wrapped in a shroud as a corpse, was granted permission by the Romans to start a rabbinical school. Through this school, Judaism was reconstituted as a "religion of the book" based on the Pentateuch and the Talmudic commentary of rabbis, fundamentally transforming Jewish life and identity.

How did Jochanan ben Zakkai transform Judaism after 70 AD?

During the catastrophic Roman siege of Jerusalem in 70 AD, Jochanan ben Zakkai, a rabbi and deputy head of the Sanhedrin, recognized that the violent revolutionary path of the Zealots was leading to disaster. Prioritizing the survival of his people over militant rebellion, he had himself smuggled out of the besieged city wrapped in a shroud, pretending to be a corpse. Because he was known to Roman authorities as a friend of Rome, he was granted a single request by the Roman general Titus: permission to establish a rabbinical school at Jabneh.

This school served as the incubator for a profound transformation of the Jewish faith. Following the destruction of Jerusalem, the Jewish people were left with no Temple, no priesthood, no Sanhedrin, and no means of offering burnt sacrifices to fulfill their covenant. In response to this existential crisis, Jochanan ben Zakkai reconstituted Judaism as a "religion of the book" based entirely around the Pentateuch and the rabbis' interpretations of it.

Because the Temple was gone, modern Judaism was essentially reborn as a debating society. The primary role of the rabbi shifted away from the lost temple rituals and toward offering commentary on the scriptures. The results of these continuous rabbinical debates and interpretations were written down over the next six centuries, ultimately becoming the Talmud, which served as the central foundation and superstructure for this newly transformed Jewish religion. Through Jochanan ben Zakkai's intervention, a religion once centered on physical sacrifice was radically redefined around textual commentary and the supreme goal of ethnic survival.

How did the Talmud become the foundation of modern Judaism?

The transformation of the Talmud into the foundation of modern Judaism was a direct consequence of the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem by the Romans in 70 AD. With the Temple destroyed, the Jewish people were left with no priesthood, no Sanhedrin, and no means of offering the burnt sacrifices required to fulfill their covenant.

In response to this existential crisis, Rabbi Jochanan ben Zakkai, who had smuggled himself out of the besieged city, was granted permission by the Romans to establish a rabbinical school at Jabneh. Because physical sacrifices were no longer possible, Judaism was reconstituted as a "religion of the book". The primary role of the rabbi shifted away from Temple rituals and toward offering commentary on the scriptures, effectively turning modern Judaism into a debating society.

The interminable debates generated by these rabbinical schools were written down over the next six centuries and became known as the Talmud. As this commentary expanded, it became the absolute basis of the new Jewish religion. By the fifth century, the Babylonian Talmud had been codified and soon became "the fundamental possession of the Jewish race, its life's breath, its very soul".

For more than a thousand years, the Talmud represented the "only true reality" for the dispersed Jewish nation. It essentially took the sacred scriptures out of the hands of ordinary Jews, making the interpretation of the law the exclusive purview of the rabbis as codified in Talmudic lore. Consequently, Jewish religious and moral life was preserved and promoted entirely through the lens of Talmudic dialectic and commentary, establishing it as the core foundation of modern Judaism.

How did the Talmud take the law out of the hands of ordinary Jews?

The Talmud took the law out of the hands of ordinary Jews by establishing a system of "control through hermeneutics," making the interpretation of sacred scripture the exclusive domain of the rabbis. Following the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem in 70 AD, the Jewish people were left without a priesthood, a Sanhedrin, or a means of physical sacrifice. In response, they reconstituted their faith around the Pentateuch, building a vast "superstructure of commentary" upon it that eventually became codified as the Talmud.

Over time, this extensive body of rabbinical commentary essentially absorbed the Torah and nullified the direct, accessible word of God for the common person. The interpretations within the Talmud were incredibly complex, deduced from the Pentateuch and strung together through endless rabbinical debates. Because there was no scientific framework to adjudicate between differing authorities, the commentary sometimes even contradicted the original texts it was meant to explain.

This shift created a rigid hierarchy of knowledge. An ordinary Jew could no longer independently appeal to or interpret the sacred writ; they required the explicit permission and guidance of the rabbis who controlled the Talmudic lore.

Furthermore, the primacy of rabbinic interpretation led to a radical shift in how the law was applied. The new rendering of the law "certainly did violence to the words of Scripture," to the point where a common saying emerged that the Talmud permitted whatever the Torah explicitly forbade. By monopolizing the interpretation of the law and substituting complex dialectic for straightforward scripture, the rabbis effectively kept the Jewish masses in "blind obedience to rabbinic control," ensuring that their own authority over the community remained absolute.

What are the differences between the Jerusalem Talmud and the Babylonian Talmud.

The provided sources offer very limited information regarding the specific differences between the Jerusalem Talmud and the Babylonian Talmud. The primary distinction mentioned in the text concerns their lasting historical impact and prominence:

• Historical Prominence: It was the Babylonian Talmud, rather than the Jerusalem Talmud, that ultimately became "the fundamental possession of the Jewish race, its life's breath, its very soul". For over a thousand years, it defined Jewish life and served as the absolute basis of reality for the dispersed Jewish nation.
  
  
• Codification of the Babylonian Talmud: The Babylonian Talmud was codified during the fifth century by the Amora'im, a process that began with Rabbi Ashi (who died in 427) and culminated in the work of Rabbi Abina (who died in 499).
  
  
• Content: The Babylonian Talmud is specifically noted for containing narratives that mock claims of Jesus's virgin birth and challenge his status as the Messiah. Scholars assert that these passages betray a "remarkably high level of familiarity with the Gospels" and represent a deliberate, sophisticated anti-Christian polemic.

The provided sources do not contain further details comparing the structure, origin, or theological differences between the two texts.

Please note that information outside of your sources indicates that the Jerusalem Talmud was compiled earlier (around the 4th century) in the Land of Israel and is generally shorter, whereas the Babylonian Talmud was compiled in the academies of Babylon, is much more extensive, and became the universally authoritative text for Jewish law. You may want to independently verify this outside information if you require a more comprehensive comparison. 

Can you elaborate on how the rabbinical control of the Jews that arose following the destruction of the temple in 70AD continued over the centuries and what eroded this control in the modern era (from say the 18th century onwards).

Following the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD, the Jewish people reconstituted their faith around the compilation of rabbinical commentary known as the Talmud. For more than a thousand years, the Talmud represented the "only true reality" for the dispersed Jewish nation. This text preserved their religious and moral life but did so by imposing strict separation and complete rabbinic control over the Jewish masses, nullifying their direct access to the scriptures. Institutionally, this control was exercised through the Kahal, an autonomous Jewish legal system that allowed Jewish elites and rabbis to adjudicate disputes internally and maintain tight, often tyrannical, control over their communities without recourse to Christian legal systems.

This rigid rabbinical hegemony remained largely intact until the 18th century, when it was eroded by the advent of the Jewish Enlightenment, or Haskalah, and the subsequent political emancipation of the Jews.

The Impact of the Jewish Enlightenment (Haskalah) The primary catalyst for the dissolution of rabbinic control was the German-Jewish philosopher Moses Mendelssohn. In 18th-century Germany, Mendelssohn initiated an Enlightenment movement that "shattered the protective shell of orthodoxy and opened the way to acquaintance with Western culture". Through his influence, "the reign of the Talmud and the rabbis was broken".

As the Enlightenment spread, young Jews began reading secular philosophers like Voltaire and Kant, attempting to adjust Judaism to the modern world. Intellectuals like Salomon Maimon fled the shtetls of the East for Berlin, deliberately abandoning what they saw as "Talmudic darkness". Maimon and others vehemently rejected the rabbis' "mind-killing business" of endless hair-splitting and quibbling, which they felt built "castles in the air" with no grounding in reality. The traditional authority of the rabbis came to be viewed by enlightened Jews as "rabbinical mumbo jumbo" and a parasitic anomaly.

Political Emancipation and State Intervention The breakdown of rabbinic control was accelerated by the intervention of the modern state. During the French Revolution and the conquests of Napoleon, Jews were offered civil emancipation and citizenship. Napoleon's convocation of the "Sanhedrin" in Paris in 1806 was a deliberate effort to usurp the rabbis' authority; he demanded that Jews recognize France as their new "Israel" and transfer their primary allegiance from their religious leaders to the French state.

Similarly, in the Russian Empire, government reformers sought to integrate Jews by intentionally breaking the power of the Kahal. Russian officials recognized that the "Jewish priests, known as Rabbis, hold their people in an unbelievable dependence and forbid them in the name of their faith to read any book other than the Talmud". In 1844, the Russian government officially abolished the Kahal, dividing its functions among local secular governments in a bid to end Jewish isolation. Furthermore, the Russian government established state-run schools for Jewish youth designed specifically to eradicate the "harmful prejudices instilled by the study of Torah".

The Aftermath: From Orthodoxy to Nihilism and Revolution The erosion of rabbinical control had profound and unintended consequences. The Mendelssohnian Enlightenment successfully destroyed Talmudic orthodoxy for many young Jews, but it failed to replace it with a stable religious alternative. Deprived of the all-encompassing worldview of the Talmud, a rising generation of secularized Jews experienced a severe identity crisis.

Having broken the "iron yoke" of the rabbis, these young Jews found themselves alienated from traditional Judaism but largely unassimilated into the Christian cultures around them. The spiritual vacuum left by the eradication of Talmudic law was quickly filled by nihilism and secular messianic politics. Obsessed with universal ideals of brotherhood and equality, this newly emancipated and secularized Jewish intelligentsia took the messianic fervor previously directed by the rabbis and transferred it to radical political movements. Ultimately, the collapse of rabbinic control transformed the marginalized Talmudic student into the vanguard of modern revolutionary socialism and Communism. 

The City of London

The City of London is what Brendon O'Connell constantly references in conjunction with the European Banking Cartel. I came across this tweet today.

Here is Gemini's decidedly uncontroversial but nonetheless interesting account of The City of London's history and current status.

The City of London, often referred to as the "Square Mile," is a distinct city, ceremonial county, and local government district situated at the historic core of the wider Greater London metropolis. Operating essentially as a city within a city, it maintains its own ancient government, police force, and legal privileges that set it apart from the rest of the United Kingdom.

Origins and History

The City of London occupies the original footprint of Londinium, a settlement established by the Romans around AD 47. Due to its strategic position on the River Thames, it rapidly grew into a major port and commercial hub. Even after the withdrawal of the Roman Empire in the 5th century and periods of abandonment, the area was revitalized under Anglo-Saxon rule, particularly when Alfred the Great refounded the walled city in 886.

Following the Norman Conquest in 1066, William the Conqueror built the Tower of London to maintain control over the powerful city, but he also issued a royal charter in 1067 guaranteeing the citizens the rights and privileges they had enjoyed under Edward the Confessor. This established a precedent of autonomy that persisted through the centuries. While the monarch and national government established themselves to the west in the separate City of Westminster, the City of London dedicated itself to trade, guilds, and finance. It became the principal source of loans for monarchs, which further cemented its political independence and allowed it to negotiate ongoing self-governance.

Unique Governance

The City is administered by the City of London Corporation, the oldest continuous municipal democracy in the world, with roots predating the national Parliament. Its governance structure is fundamentally different from the 32 London boroughs that surround it:

• The Lord Mayor: The Corporation is headed by the Lord Mayor of London (a distinct and much older role than the modern Mayor of London). The Lord Mayor serves a one-year term, acts as a global ambassador for the UK's financial services sector, and resides at the Mansion House.
• Ancient Councils: Decision-making operates through the Court of Aldermen and the Court of Common Council, systems that evolved from medieval administrative courts in the 12th and 13th centuries.
• The Business Vote: Uniquely, both residents and businesses have voting rights in local elections. Because the City is primarily commercial, the business vote heavily outnumbers the residential vote, ensuring that the local government is closely aligned with the needs of the financial sector.
• Independent Services: The City maintains its own independent police force, the City of London Police, which specializes in economic crime and fraud, separate from the Metropolitan Police that serves the rest of Greater London.

Current Economic Status

Today, the City of London is one of the world's preeminent financial and business centers. While it has a small residential population of roughly 8,600 people, it accommodates a daily influx of over 670,000 commuting workers.

• Financial Hub: The Square Mile generates approximately £109 billion in economic output annually and accounts for one in every five financial services jobs in Great Britain. It is home to the Bank of England, the London Stock Exchange, and over 250 foreign banks.
• Global Position: Despite geopolitical shifts and debates over listing destinations, the City remains Europe's leading financial market and ranks securely behind only New York on the Global Financial Centres Index.
• Modern Expansion: The Corporation has increasingly focused on expanding into innovative sectors such as fintech, green finance, and cyber security to maintain its global competitiveness and adapt to the structural shift toward professional and technical services.

I asked Gemini about the connections between the City of London and the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) and its report makes clear the extraordinary legal and financial independence each institution has.

BIS headquarters in Basel, Switzerland

The connections between the City of London and the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) in Basel are foundational, operating at the highest levels of global monetary policy, banking regulation, and financial infrastructure.

While the City of London is a sovereign financial district and the BIS is an international organization, they are inextricably linked through the Bank of England (which resides in the City), shared regulatory frameworks, and a mutual focus on global financial stability.

The Bank of England: The Primary Bridge

The most direct physical and institutional connection between the two entities is the Bank of England (BoE). Headquartered on Threadneedle Street within the Square Mile, the BoE acts as the City's representative in the global central banking community.

• Foundational Role: The BIS was established in 1930, initially to handle German reparations after World War I. Montagu Norman, the highly influential Governor of the Bank of England at the time, was a primary architect of the BIS. He envisioned it as a way to institutionalize cooperation among central bank governors outside the interference of politicians.
• Ongoing Leadership: The BoE is a major shareholder and a permanent member of the BIS Board of Directors. Senior figures from the Bank of England regularly travel to Basel for the bi-monthly meetings of central bank governors, often referred to as the most exclusive club in global finance.

The Basel Accords and City Regulation

The most profound impact the BIS has on the day-to-day operations of the City of London is regulatory. The BIS hosts the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS), the primary global standard-setter for the prudential regulation of banks.

• Capital Requirements: The agreements forged in Basel—known as Basel I, II, III, and the incoming Basel IV—dictate how much capital banks must hold in reserve to prevent financial collapse.
• Impact on the Square Mile: Because the City of London is home to over 250 foreign banks and handles a massive percentage of global foreign exchange and derivatives trading, the rules drafted in Basel directly shape the profitability, risk models, and daily operations of nearly every financial institution operating within the City. The BoE’s Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA), located in the City, is responsible for enforcing these Basel standards within the UK.

The BIS Innovation Hub in London

In recent years, the connection has expanded from traditional monetary policy into financial technology. Recognizing the City of London's status as a premier global center for fintech, the BIS established a node of its BIS Innovation Hub in London in 2021.

Operated in partnership with the Bank of England, this hub focuses on developing public goods in the technology space to support central banks globally. Its projects in London concentrate on:

• Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs): Exploring the architecture and implications of digital fiat money.
• Next-Generation Financial Market Infrastructures: Developing systems to settle tokenized assets and modernize global payment networks.
• RegTech and SupTech: Creating technological tools to help regulators better monitor the massive data flows generated by financial hubs like the City of London.

Parallel Legal Anomalies

Both the City of London and the BIS share a unique structural characteristic: they both operate with extraordinary legal autonomy that shields them from standard domestic oversight.

• The City of London operates under ancient charters, maintaining its own separate government (the City of London Corporation), its own police force specializing in economic crime, and an electoral system where corporations outvote human residents.
• The BIS operates under an international treaty (the Hague Agreement of 1930) that grants its headquarters in Basel sovereign immunity. Its premises are legally inviolable; Swiss authorities cannot enter without permission, its assets are immune from seizure, and its communications are protected.

In essence, the City of London acts as the operational engine of global capital markets, while the BIS in Basel serves as the chief architect of the rules that govern that engine.

The following interesting map accompanies the Wikipedia article about the BIS. 

Source: Wikipedia

The Heritage Foundation

Brendon O'Connell has been mentioning the Heritage Foundation in the United States a lot recently, stating that it acts a counter to the multipolar world order espoused by the City of London/European banking cartel. Let's hope so. Gemini had this to say about the Foundation:

The Heritage Foundation: An Overview

The Heritage Foundation is one of the most prominent and influential conservative public policy research organizations, or think tanks, in the United States. Based in Washington, D.C., it has played a central role in shaping right-wing policy and Republican presidential agendas for over five decades.

Here is a comprehensive overview of the organization's history, mission, leadership, and major initiatives.

Core Mission and Philosophy

The Heritage Foundation's stated mission is to formulate and promote conservative public policies. Its core philosophical pillars include:

• Free enterprise: Advocating for deregulation, lower taxes, and corporate growth.
• Limited government: Seeking to reduce the size, scope, and spending of the federal government.
• Individual freedom: Promoting policies aligned with conservative interpretations of constitutional rights.
• Traditional American values: Supporting culturally conservative policies, often aligned with "biblically based" definitions of family and society.
• Strong national defense: Pushing for a robust military and aggressive foreign policy deterrence.

History and Rise to Prominence

• Founding: The organization was established in February 1973 by conservative activists Paul Weyrich and Edwin Feulner, alongside initial funding from brewing magnate Joseph Coors.
• The Reagan Era: The foundation skyrocketed to national prominence in 1981 when it published the Mandate for Leadership, a comprehensive manual aimed at reducing the size of the federal government. The Reagan administration famously adopted roughly 60% of its 2,000 policy recommendations within its first year.
• Ongoing Influence: Since the 1980s, the foundation has consistently provided ideological blueprints, personnel databases, and legislative roadmaps for incoming Republican administrations and members of Congress.

Current Leadership

• Kevin D. Roberts, PhD: Roberts became the seventh president of The Heritage Foundation in October 2021. Under his leadership, the organization has embraced a more populist, aggressive conservative approach.
• Strategic Shift: Roberts has been credited with shifting the foundation's focus toward "institutionalizing Trumpism," working to ensure that right-wing populist rhetoric is backed by actionable, structural policy plans and pre-vetted personnel.

Major Recent Initiatives

In recent years, the foundation has focused heavily on creating exhaustive transition playbooks for conservative presidential administrations.

Project 2025

Launched in 2023 ahead of the 2024 presidential election, Project 2025 (officially Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise) was a sprawling 900-page initiative designed to radically restructure the executive branch.

• Executive Power: It relied on a controversial interpretation of the "unitary executive theory," aiming to consolidate massive amounts of power directly under the president and strip independence from federal agencies.
• Policy Goals: The blueprint called for mass deportations of undocumented immigrants, the dismantling of the Department of Education, the reversal of LGBTQ+ non-discrimination protections, the elimination of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs, and the heavy restriction of abortion access (including using the Comstock Act to ban the mailing of abortion medication).
• Implementation: Following the 2024 election, many key architects of Project 2025 secured prominent roles in the new administration, leading to the swift implementation of several of its executive branch recommendations.

Project 2026

Released in late 2025, Project 2026 serves as an extension of the previous mandate.

• Focus on the Family: It places "restoring the nuclear family" at the center of its agenda, explicitly defining a family as a married man and woman.
• Social Safety Nets: The 2026 framework pushes for significant cuts to federal safety nets like Medicaid and seeks to further eliminate federal civil rights oversight in education and health care.

Influence and Controversy

The Heritage Foundation is widely celebrated within conservative circles as a "solutions factory" that successfully translates right-wing ideology into concrete political action. Its ability to unify various conservative factions and effectively staff presidential transition teams makes it a powerhouse in Washington.

Conversely, the organization is fiercely opposed by civil rights groups, Democrats, and progressives. Critics, including the ACLU, argue that the foundation's recent initiatives serve as an authoritarian playbook designed to erode the American system of checks and balances, marginalize vulnerable communities, and replace the rule of law with extreme ideological mandates.

******************************

Kevin Roberts, the current head of the Heritage Foundation found himself under pressure recently for suggesting that criticising Israel is not anti-semitic. Here is a quote from Wikipedia (the source of all knowledge in the known universe):

In October 2025, Roberts released a video statement defending Tucker Carlson after Carlson interviewed far-right political commentator Nick Fuentes on The Tucker Carlson Show. Roberts said that "Christians can critique the state of Israel without being antisemitic" and that Carlson's detractors were a "venomous coalition", which many Jews and Republicans, including U.S. Senator Ted Cruz, saw as an antisemitic trope. After immense pressure, including a series of resignations from the Heritage Foundation, condemnations mainly from Jewish Republican figures, and a letter of demands from the National Task Force to Combat Antisemitism, Roberts issued an apology, later clarifying that the script he read in the video was composed by an aide who has resigned. After the controversy, The Washington Free Beacon released a video of a staff meeting in which Roberts said he was not very familiar with Fuentes and which a Heritage senior legal fellow called a "master class in cowardice". In November 2025, American legal scholar and longtime Heritage Foundation board member Robert P. George resigned from the organization, citing Roberts's refusal to fully recant remarks he had made in his response to Carlson. Two more board members, Shane McCullar and Abby Spencer Moffat, resigned in December 2025 amid the fallout from Roberts's defense of Carlson.

According to the above he backed down from his remarks but it remains to be seen whether he can stand up to the Jewish lobby.

Local AI

 I came across this interesting tweet.

The Globalist AI Trap That Could Backfire Hard 

The plan was simple from their side. Build massive centralized cloud AI that everyone depends on. Subscription model. Data harvested 24/7. Censorship baked in. One ring to control all the computing. That is how you get the "you will own nothing and use our AI" world they have been building toward.

But something interesting is happening right now.

More engineers and regular users are running open source models locally on their own hardware. Ollama, LM Studio, PrivateGPT, Llama 3.1 derivatives, even smaller efficient versions of Claude-class models that run completely offline on a decent laptop or home server. No cloud. No subscription. No data leaving your machine. No central kill switch.

It is becoming practical for real work. Coding. Research. Document analysis. Personal automation. Financial modeling. All without phoning home to San Francisco or Davos-aligned servers. There was a time when everyone believed Computers would only exist on the floors of university campuses. Then the Home PC came about.

If this trend accelerates the globalist vision gets a major problem. Their entire control layer assumes you need their centralized infrastructure. Local AI breaks that dependency. It hands sovereignty back to the individual. No more "your AI is down for maintenance" or "this prompt violates our policy" or "we updated the model and now it refuses your request."  What if ...what they are building is far beyond what the average person actually needs and we reject their subscriptions and build our own onsite systems in our homes and businesses?

Unintended consequence for everyone else: The big centralized AI companies lose their moat. Subscription revenue collapses. Data monopolies shrink. Global regulation becomes almost impossible when models run on millions of disconnected devices. The very tool they thought would lock humanity into dependency could become the tool that sets millions free.

As a CTO who has spent decades building systems I see both sides. Local AI is messy right now. It requires hardware knowledge and some setup. But every month it gets easier and more powerful. The globalists bet everything on central control. They may have just handed regular people the off switch. Neither side is going to stop but the uncomfortable truth?  There are far far more home hackers helping to develop linux-like open source systems than they are comfortable with.

Maybe this is why RAM suddenly became so expensive?

This is the same pattern we keep seeing. They build the machine to control us. We quietly build the workaround.

If you are already running local models or thinking about ditching cloud SaaS DM me what you are using and how it is working. Bookmark quote or share if this angle hits home. Follow for more on how the machinery can be turned against itself.

The tweet goes on to list the top reliable guides and resources (all current as of Feb 2026). Here is a little more about the current RAM shortage (generated by Gemini):

RAM prices are soaring in 2026 due to extreme demand from AI data centers, which are consuming the majority of high-performance memory (HBM and DDR5) supply. Major manufacturers like Samsung, SK Hynix, and Micron are prioritizing these high-margin AI, causing shortages and price spikes for consumer electronics. 

Key Aspects of the Expensive RAM + AI Situation:

• AI Data Center Demand: Training and running large AI models require massive amounts of memory, creating a bottleneck that has manufacturers pivoting production away from consumer RAM. 

• Memory Shortage/Price Surge: RAM prices have surged significantly in early 2026 compared to 2025, according to Counterpoint Research. Some kits have more than doubled in price over the past year. 

• DDR4 Phase-out: Manufacturers are reducing production of older DDR4 to focus on DDR5, causing scarcity and rising prices for older systems. 

• The "Memory Wall": AI performance is frequently limited by memory speed and capacity, leading to a "memory wall" where expensive GPUs wait for data. 

• Impact on Consumers: The high costs are expected to persist for the next couple of years, affecting the price of new PCs, laptops, and upgrade kits. 

There's no doubt that an ideal of the global elite would be to turn all home computing devices into dumb terminals that serve only to connect to the Internet and can do nothing locally. At least some people are working to subvert that ideal.

Migration and the 2020 Agenda

 

Link to Document

The following tweet sums things up pretty well:

I just read the entire Migration and the 2030 Agenda: A Guide for Practitioners, and if you strip out all the humanitarian, climate-change and “progress for humanity” language, here’s what it boils down to.

Generated by Gemini based on post content

They want a managed global population with no stubborn rooted majorities, no strong old-world identities, and no independent power centers, so they suppress Western fertility through pharmakia, food and water contamination, psychological warfare and propaganda, then present the resulting demographic collapse as a neutral problem and “solve” it with permanent mass migration that keeps the debt economy running, dilutes historic white/Christian populations, breaks social cohesion, and justifies a thick web of surveillance, speech control, NGO management and UN-style governance over human bodies, borders, labour and money until most people are interchangeable, trackable units in a post-national, post-Christian, post-ethnic grid.

They do not just bulldoze everyone because they still need a large, frightened, semi-healthy herd to work, consume, and validate their status, they do not have absolute unified power, open slaughter risks revolt and delegitimizes the system, and the kind of people who build this architecture think in terms of slow, deniable, legalistic pressure and manufactured consent, so poison comes as medicine, control comes as care, demographic replacement comes as compassion, and they keep tightening the cage while pretending nothing fundamental is happening.

What to do about it? That is the question. At least knowing about it is a start and the majority of people do NOT know about it. 

Yet Another Use For Nano Bananas

I often come across images in the alternative media that are in English but Nano Bananas will readily change the text to any language you desire. Here I've changed three images about chemtrails, mosquito inoculation and geoengineering from English to Indonesian.

It's all about spreading information that hopefully wakes some people up and so this use of Nano Bananas as a language translation tool makes it very useful in that regard. Infographics with text in the person's native language can have a powerful impact and its easily shared.

Ivermectin Paste

 I was reminded about Ivermectin paste after this tweet today:

Let's do a quick search for the availability of Ivermectin paste in Jakarta:

AI Overview

Ivermectin paste (1.87% equine dewormer) is available in Jakarta primarily through online international retailers like Ubuy Indonesia, which offers brands like Bimectin and Durvet with shipping. It is generally not available in local physical stores, but sometimes listed on platforms like Tokopedia from specialty importers. 

• Availability: Primarily via online import (Ubuy, Tokopedia).
• Common Brands: Bimectin, Durvet, IverCare.
• Product Type: 1.87% paste designed for horse deworming. 

It is important to ensure any product purchased is for its intended veterinary use.

Ah, so it's a "horse dewormer" and not to be used for any other purpose (such as treating skin cancer). This is pretty much the expected response from Google and the same rhetoric that was used to disparage its use during the Covid plandemic. Let's try to amass some sources using NotebookLM using the following prompt:

Search the web for all information relating to Ivermectin paste as an effective topical treatment for skin cancer and other skin disorders.

51 sources were gathered with the following summary:

Ivermectin is a versatile antiparasitic that effectively treats Demodex mites, rosacea, and tropical diseases. While experimental research explores its anticancer and antiviral potential, clinical evidence for these uses is lacking. Supratherapeutic doses cause neurotoxicity. 

Yes, don't misuse it or you'll fry your brain. Again, pretty much as expected. Let's try a different prompt that will perhaps exclude all this negativity.

Find sources that support the use of Ivermectin as a topical treatment in humans for skin cancer and other skin disorders. I am not interested in caveats or cautions as to its proper use. Search only for present its use for human skin conditions positively.

This time 42 sources were gathered and the summary is a little more positive:

Ivermectin is a versatile drug used to treat parasitic infestations like scabies, rosacea, and Demodex mites. Research highlights its anti-inflammatory properties and potential as an anticancer agent. While effective for skin issues, its use for COVID-19 remains debated.

Let's be more explicit. I asked the following:

Summarise the information relating to Ivermectin paste's use in treating skin cancer in humans. 

The summary of its response was:

While ivermectin demonstrates potential antitumor activity in laboratory and animal studies, there is currently no evidence to support the use of ivermectin paste or cream for treating skin cancer in humans. Standard evidence-based treatments for skin cancer remain surgical excision, Mohs surgery, and radiation therapy.

Of course, no human trials on a drug whose patent has expired are likely to carried out and even less likely to be published even if they were. Medical research labs and medical publishing  houses rely on funding from Big Pharma. Mavericks who try to bypass this control mechanism are quickly ostracised by the medical community and achieve pariah status. 

Trying to push this matter further only brings you up against the "current medical consensus" and it's clear that an objective overview will never be provided by Gemini. The algorithm is heavily biased toward supporting mainstream narratives. Any evidence to support Ivermectin's efficacy is scattered and anecdotal such as the story that opened this post. Thus "surgical excision, Mohs surgery, and radiation therapy" will remain the recommended treatment for skin cancers.

The doctor who removed two basal cell carcinomas from me in Australia made a living from the surgical excision procedure. He was a nice guy. I'm sure he believed that he was doing the best by his patients. Even if he was willing to experiment with Ivermectin paste, he would risk deregistration as a doctor by the medical mafia if he were discovered. 

Saying all this, I don't blindly believe that Ivermectin paste will cure skin cancer but I certainly entertain it as a possibility because I understand how closely the doors to medically-approved cancer treatments are guarded. An industry has grown up around cancer treatment and it generates billion dollar profits for the medical mafia. Woe betide anything or anyone that threatens this.

Meanwhile here's a site for ordering Ivermection: https://genixmeds.com/.

ADDENDUM 1:

Mohs surgery is a highly precise, tissue-sparing procedure used to treat common skin cancers (basal cell and squamous cell carcinoma) by removing thin layers of cancer, checking them immediately under a microscope, and continuing until no cancer cells remain. It offers the highest cure rates (up to 99%) while preserving healthy skin, making it ideal for sensitive areas like the face, neck, and hands. 

Key Aspects of Mohs Surgery:

• Procedure Method: The surgeon removes a thin layer of visible tumor, maps it, and examines it under a microscope to identify hidden "roots".
• Targeted Removal: If cancer cells are present at the edges (margins), the process is repeated only in those specific areas, allowing for minimal damage to surrounding healthy tissue.
• High Cure Rate: It is the most effective technique for treating high-risk, recurring, or complex skin cancers, with a 5-year cure rate of 92-99%.
• Application Areas: It is commonly used for skin cancers on the head, neck, ears, nose, lips, hands, and feet.
• Recovery: After the area is cancer-free, the wound is closed with stitches, a skin graft, or a skin flap. 

This technique, which was developed in the 1930s, is often performed in an office setting under local anesthesia.

ADDENDUM 2:

🚨 Dr. William Makis MD – Cancer Protocol A powerful protocol using Ivermectin + Fenbendazole for remission, aggressive cancer, and poor prognosis.

📌 Ivermectin 

– 0.5–2.5mg/kg/day based on cancer severity 

– Proven results: prostate, ovarian, gallbladder, brain cancer 

– No long-term side effects (even at high doses)

📌 Fenbendazole 

– 222–1000mg/day (6 days/week) 

– Add: CBD, Curcumin, Milk Thistle 

– Supports liver/kidney health

🧪 Real case studies.

📷 Full dosage chart below

Source: link