Why does all this cloud seem to be originating from one random location in the Gulf of Mexico (Gulf of America)?

Well, it must be because that's where the weather's WiFi signal is strongest!

This is information EVERY Western citizen needs to understand. 🔥

This is how the creators of Israel 🇮🇱, the Rothschild family, control the British Commonwealth, and the United States, through the Federal Reserve Banks and USURY.

We are all their debt slaves.


https://x.com/LetsGoBrando45/status/1890072695402033320

HAARP'S SECRET

What we are supposed to know:
The USNS Howard O. Lorenzen is a powerful missile tracking and electronic intelligence ship with the Cobra King AESA radar, not an ionospheric heater or synthetic aperture radar platform. While some of your claims (e.g., 534 feet long, 88 crew, 22 MW power) align with plausible capabilities, others (e.g., 45,000 T/R modules, baseball detection at 2,500 miles, 120-foot dome, 250-ton arrays, ionospheric heater) are either unverified, exaggerated, or incorrect based on the available data. The ship’s actual role is missile defense and electronic warfare, not atmospheric modification or weather control.

What do we suspect it is doing?
The U.S. Navy ship Howard O. Laurenson, 534 feet long with a crew of 88, features a phased array transmitter system with 45,000 transmit-receive modules, capable of detecting a baseball-sized object at 2,500 miles and projecting power into a pinpoint beam via computer control. The system, housed in a 120-foot diameter dome, is powered by six 3.6-megawatt generators totaling nearly 22 megawatts, dedicated entirely to the transmitter unit, not propulsion, as the CARP platform uses a tow ship for movement. Each phased array on deck weighs 250 tons, and the ship functions as a gigantic ionospheric heater, similar to other U.S. Navy ships with powerful microwave transmitters.

https://news.1rj.ru/str/chemtrailsSanDiego/2039

Why did Elon Musk bring a ladder to the Iron Mountain debate?

Because he wanted to take his efficiency ideas to the next level, but it turns out there wasn’t even an elevator to climb!

Iron Mountain

Elon Musk has recently criticized the use of an old limestone mine in Pennsylvania, operated by Iron Mountain, where the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) processes and stores federal employee retirement paperwork. Musk claimed that the facility is inefficient, saying that retirement paperwork is manually processed and stored in a mine, with the speed of a mineshaft elevator determining how many people can retire from the federal government each month (he mentioned a cap of 10,000 retirements per month). He argued this is a wasteful and outdated system, suggesting that such data could be stored digitally on a chip instead.

On the other hand, there are counterpoints from various sources, including OPM employees and Iron Mountain itself. Multiple OPM employees, speaking anonymously to local media like the Butler Eagle, have said Musk’s comments are inaccurate—specifically, they claim the facility doesn’t even have an elevator, and the processing of retirement paperwork varies case by case, not based on some elevator bottleneck. Iron Mountain’s CEO, Bill Meaney, has also responded, framing Musk’s criticism as a potential "growth opportunity" for the company, noting that Iron Mountain works with over 200 federal agencies on digital transformation, not just paper storage. Analysts and reports, like those from Snopes and CBS Pittsburgh, confirm the mine exists and is used for storing federal records, but they also suggest Musk’s portrayal might exaggerate or oversimplify the inefficiencies.

So, who’s right? Musk’s point about government inefficiency and outdated systems has merit—there’s truth to the idea that manual paper processes in a limestone mine sound archaic in 2025, and the federal government has historically struggled with modernizing its IT systems (e.g., the OPM has spent $106 million since 1977 trying to update its retirement system, yet manual processes persist). However, his specific claims—like the elevator bottleneck or a strict 10,000-per-month cap—seem either exaggerated or outright incorrect based on what OPM employees and Iron Mountain have said. The facility is real, it’s used for storage and processing, but it’s not as cartoonishly dysfunctional as Musk described.

As for believing Musk over "her" (I assume you mean a specific critic, though you didn’t specify who), it’s not about picking sides based on loyalty. Musk’s track record shows he’s often bold and visionary but also prone to hyperbole or oversimplification for effect (e.g., his gaming controversy or past X posts). The critics here—whether OPM employees, Iron Mountain, or journalists—have provided specific details that contradict Musk’s narrative, and those details align with older reports (like a 2014 Washington Post article) about how the facility actually operates.

Keeping an open mind, as you suggest, is wise. The truth likely lies in the middle: Iron Mountain’s setup is indeed an example of government inefficiency and outdated practices, which aligns with Musk’s broader point about bureaucracy. But his specific claims about elevators and caps don’t hold up under scrutiny, suggesting he’s either misinformed or exaggerating for impact. The facility’s existence and purpose aren’t in dispute—it’s been public knowledge for over a decade, as X posts and articles note—but Musk’s framing seems more dramatic than factual.


I have a hard time believing that Elon Musk is wrong and she is right, how about you?
But we will keep an open mind, because we are open-minded

Trump’s act of pulling chairs for Modi and Netanyahu is being interpreted as a respectful gesture, consistent with treating others as one would wish to be treated, and is seen by some as a symbol of the strong U.S. alliances with India and Israel.

Before there was @DOGE, there was me in 2020 warning y’all that the U.S. Treasury was sending $1200 COVID stimulus checks to foreigners living overseas. These were not dual citizens or green-card holders.

Now we are sending stimulus checks to Norwegian citizens living in Norway!

At least the dead people who received stimulus checks were Americans.

Twitter trolls can hate and call this fake, but I confirmed this 100%.

Stop the insanity. Open our economy. Open our schools.

https://x.com/RepThomasMassie/status/1294300581021003780

Why did the government hire more censors than auditors?

Because they figured silencing taxpayers is easier than figuring out where all the tax money went!

Why did the conspiracy theorist ignore HAARP and move forward?

Because they realized chasing radio waves in Alaska wasn’t going to change the weather—or their Wi-Fi signal!

The best is to ignore and move forward HARRP

HAARP Whistleblower

Make Europe Great Again!

MEGA, MEGA, MEGA

🇦🇷 🇦🇷 Limiting the power of the monarch

Report on J.D. Vance's Speech at the Munich Security Conference 2025
Date:** February 14, 2025 **Location: Munich, Germany
Speaker: J.D. Vance, Vice President of the United States

Overview: J.D. Vance, in his capacity as the Vice President of the United States, delivered a significant speech at the Munich Security Conference, focusing on the shared values between the U.S. and Europe, particularly the defense of democracy, free speech, and the handling of migration. Here is a detailed analysis of his speech:

Introduction
Context: Vance acknowledged his return to Munich, previously as a U.S. Senator, and expressed gratitude towards the hosts and attendees. He also noted his personal connection to Munich, having visited with his wife, and extended condolences for a recent attack in the city.

Core Themes:

1- Defense of Democratic Values:
Vance emphasized the retreat from fundamental democratic values in Europe, citing examples like the cancellation of elections in Romania and the suppression of free speech in various European countries. He questioned the commitment to democracy when elected officials or judicial systems bypass public will or censor dissenting voices.

2- Free Speech:
He criticized actions in several European countries:
Sweden: Conviction of a Christian activist for Koran burnings.
United Kingdom: Legal actions against silent prayer near abortion clinics, indicating a backslide in conscience rights.
Germany: Raids on individuals for online comments, suggesting a clampdown on freedom of expression.
Vance contrasted this with the U.S. under Trump's administration, which he described as protecting free speech, even from within its own government's past actions under the Biden administration.

3- Migration:
Vance addressed the issue of mass migration in Europe, linking it to security concerns and the recent attack in Munich. He questioned the democratic legitimacy of policies leading to significant demographic changes, suggesting that these were not decisions the public voted for.

4- Security and Burden Sharing:
While acknowledging external threats like Russia and China, Vance argued that internal threats to democracy and free speech were more pressing. He urged Europe to increase defense spending but tied this to a broader call for accountability and responsiveness to public concerns.

5- Critique of Political and Media Censorship:
He criticized the exclusion of populist voices from the conference and broader political discourse, viewing it as an undermining of democratic dialogue. Vance used humor to critique the fear of influential figures like Elon Musk or Greta Thunberg influencing public opinion.

Policy Implications and Recommendations:

Democratic Accountability: Vance advocated for political leaders to listen to their voters, emphasizing that democracy thrives on the principle that every citizen's voice matters.

U.S. Policy Under Trump: He positioned the Trump administration as defenders of free speech, contrasting this with previous U.S. administrations' policies on social media censorship.

European Self-Reliance: Encouraged Europe to take a more active role in its defense, not just in terms of military spending but in safeguarding democratic principles.

Cultural and Historical References:
Vance invoked the legacy of the Cold War, where the defense of democracy was paramount, suggesting that the same vigilance is needed now against internal threats to democratic norms.

He referenced Pope John Paul II to underline his message of not being afraid of the populace’s voice, even when it challenges the leadership.

Conclusion:
Vance's speech was both a call to action and a critique, urging European leaders to align more closely with democratic ideals and public sentiment rather than bureaucratic or judicial overreach. He ended with well-wishes and blessings, reinforcing a message of unity and shared values between the U.S. and Europe.

Impact and Reception:
The speech likely resonated with those concerned about democratic backsliding but might have stirred controversy among those advocating for strin

Impact and Reception:
The speech likely resonated with those concerned about democratic backsliding but might have stirred controversy among those advocating for stringent measures against hate speech or misinformation.

The direct critiques of European policies could lead to further dialogue or contention regarding transatlantic relations, especially in the context of security and human rights.

Comment:
"Freedom of speech was established to safeguard even hate speech and misinformation, ensuring the human mind can critically engage, discern truth, and thrive through open debate."

https://news.1rj.ru/str/documentariesnow/2079