The contemporary understanding of the ‘black nobility’ didn’t really exist until Coleman began spreading it in the early 1970s. The original historical term referred to something quite different

The book, the committee of 300, deliberately destroys all metadata - throwing names, dates, and institutions into a single bucket, making it nearly impossible to reverse engineer any specific claim

ive just read shillenberger's post on epstein, and... yeah... he says that either Epstein was running a sex blackmail operation for intelligence agencies, or he was a self-serving pervert acting alone. but the files don't support option A, therefore option B.

the third option - which he doesnt consider - is Epstein as the central switchboard node.

he presents a false binary. i didn't trust him one bit before reading it, and i trust him even less now.

https://escapekey.substack.com/p/epstein

not impressed by Webb's response ftr. she's spent years developing the intelligence-blackmail thesis, and now that the files don't support it, she's pivoting to financial crimes

but that still doesn't get to what the emails actually show

i think this is flying a little too close to the sun

her two-volume book is literally called One Nation Under Blackmail. the intelligence-blackmail thesis was her thesis

https://www.theburningplatform.com/2026/02/27/epstein-mythology/

it's not all about blackmail, get real. i've been consistent about this. blackmail on its own never could facilitate the outcome - if there is a single 'thing' which could, it's systems theory.

blackmail is coercion between two people. it doesn't scale, and it doesn't build institutions. systems theory explains how you coordinate JPMorgan, the Gates Foundation, a former Treasury Secretary, and Israeli intelligence into building interlocking layers of the same financial architecture - without any of them needing to be threatened, and without most of them needing to see the whole picture.

Amusing how many comments I now receive on substack all of a sudden that I am ‘jaded’. Look, you’re making it too obvious. At least phase it in gradually.

Oh wow so many aggressive comments on substack now, and commonly from 2 follower accounts.

The ‘mute’ button is receiving quite the polishing this morning.

reminder that Christine Maxwell sat on the Santa Fe Institute's board of trustees

https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/41287

yeah, sure, NOW the fabian parasite is upset, how dare the iranians respond to aggression.

https://t.me/robinmg/45432

apologies if i don’t reply a lot on substack atm, notification counts are a bit overwhelming.

CAF’s TC interview has led to around 400 new subscribers, and has led to a lot of activity.

anyway, this is one realisation i had a few days ago. they compartmentalised everything. i reckon that’s a major flaw in their strategy, because now they have no-one who can argue the cross-disciplinary case.

another of the few recent substack comments of mine.


the origin of the BIS, essentially, comes back to the transnational merchant banks of the 19th century, of which the House of Rothschild was a major one.

what’s also of note is that the first boards were inclusive of representation from large scale enterprise. that enterprise? you got it - transnational merchant banks were included.

those 7 seats were eliminated iirc in 1944 with Bretton Woods/IMF. in essence, the work was largely complete at the BIS (an established, predictable flow of outputs was the outcome), and they now moved to shape international fiscal policy.

that’s in essence what they do, i reckon. they create one organisation, ensure its outouts can be predicted, and then they leave and establish the organisation which take those predictable outputs and shape them further - until one day, those replies also are fully predictable.

that way, you eventually get a small handful of people, controlling everything, while you’re none the wiser.

how can these people just stand there and lie?

normal people have shame. what kind of complete psychopath must you be to just lie like this, continuously?

is there a course to learn these skills, and which part of the fabian society should i contact to enroll?

hah, i see Sayer Ji’s moved the overton window from private greed to the foundations.

he’s still not discussing the role of the intelligence community, rothschild, the meaning of ‘social good’, that ‘impact investing’ isn’t just about pandemics, epstein’s research agenda, …

what really impresses me is the level of boosting he enjoys. because something that says “threat to the establishment” obviously receives that level of boosting on the world’s most controlled platform - twitter.

right, well, i’m not similarly shackled.

t/y Ben Rubin (and Kjell in comments)

also, unrelated to this, can i just say thank you to Mike Yeadon who I’m very happy to be in the trenches with. he’s done extraordinary work, and withstood incredible levels of criticism throughout.

https://www.ukcolumn.org/video/uk-column-news-2nd-march-2026

wasnt originally going to write this, but had to endure a few comments on substack about how this definitely was Truss’s fault.

not that i think her premiership was flawless, in fact, it was a fairly questionable episode on some counts.

but the mini budget was the fault of the Bank of England, who came out calling for even MORE powers as a result of their own failure.


https://escapekey.substack.com/p/kwartengs-mini-budget

also, needed bit of a break from the epstein emails.

here’s the PDF

the odd thing about 'Always Sunny in Philadelphia' is that although none of the show's characters have any redeeming qualities, you end up kind of liking them anyway

Netanyahu... doesn't. he's an awful human being, and... he's an awful human being.

https://t.me/disclosetv/20129

immediately after anthropic refuse the demands on the trump admin, they're under continuous 'technical difficulty'?

they couldn't have put together a better advertisement campaign if you ask me.

t/y for posts in the chat, busy working on ‘Maxwell’ will get to them in a bit