Tag: national security

Home national security
Post
December 14, 2025December 14, 2025Capitalism, Conspiracy, Corporate, Technology

America’s Largest Corporations Profit from Exposing Your Data While Small Businesses Die

by

When Code Spaces suffered a data breach in 2014, the company shut down within weeks. When Equifax exposed 147 million Americans' Social Security numbers in 2017, it recovered fully within two years and continues operating as one of three credit bureaus controlling Americans' financial lives. This isn't coincidence—it's the predictable outcome of a system where large corporations transform catastrophic data breaches from existential threats into manageable quarterly expenses.
While 60% of small businesses fail within six months of a cyberattack, Fortune 500 companies see their stock prices recover within 53 days on average. Settlement payments work out to less than $5 per affected individual—roughly the cost of a coffee—while representing less than 5% of a single quarter's profit. Meanwhile, breached data flows into a $441 billion data broker industry that aggregates, enriches, and resells personal information, creating a secondary market where stolen identities become purchasable intelligence.
The disparity isn't accidental. Through coordinated lobbying campaigns, corporations have shaped privacy legislation in over three dozen states, registered hundreds of lobbyists, and spent over $125 million to ensure that opt-out frameworks replace consumer consent, that private rights of action are eliminated, and that penalties remain negligible. When the CFPB attempted to regulate data brokers in 2024, the rule was withdrawn five months later. The result: a system designed to extract value from personal information rather than safeguard it, where small businesses die from the same breaches that large corporations absorb as rounding errors.
This investigation examines how America's largest corporations have transformed data security from a mandate into a choice—and why they consistently choose profits over protection.

Post
December 4, 2025December 4, 2025America, Conspiracy, Politics, Presidency

People Enabling Trump. Power, Policy & Consequence.

by

An investigation into the machinery of Donald Trump's second administration reveals how a core group of advisors—Stephen Miller, Pete Hegseth, Susie Wiles, Dan Scavino, Karoline Leavitt, James Blair, and Vince Haley—are translating presidential authority into concrete policy through immigration enforcement, military operations, personnel control, and institutional reorganization. Miller's documented influence has produced more than 200 executive orders targeting immigration, while Hegseth faces bipartisan congressional scrutiny over a Pentagon Inspector General report finding he violated protocols by sharing classified information on Signal and over controversial Caribbean military strikes. Scavino now controls "almost all positions in government" through the Presidential Personnel Office. This examination of Trump's first eleven months back in office documents how loyalty-based staffing, agency reorganizations, and centralized decision-making are reshaping federal institutions in ways that may outlast this administration.

Post
November 27, 2025November 30, 2025America, Conspiracy, Fascism, Politics, Presidency

Examining the Implications of Mass Leadership Dismissals Under the Trump Administration

by

Between January and November 2025, the Trump administration dismissed or forced into retirement more than a dozen senior military officers in what represents the most extensive peacetime purge of military leadership in modern American history. The dismissals included the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff—removed less than 17 months into his statutory four-year term—the first woman to serve on the Joint Chiefs, the commanders of the Coast Guard, Navy SEALs, Navy Reserve, U.S. Cyber Command, and the National Security Agency, as well as all three service judge advocates general simultaneously.

Five former secretaries of defense, representing both Republican and Democratic administrations, issued an extraordinary joint letter calling for congressional hearings, warning that the dismissals raised "troubling questions about the administration's desire to politicize the military" and removed legal constraints on presidential power. The scale and manner of these actions—combined with the administration's explicit emphasis on personal loyalty and the firing of officers who provided intelligence assessments contradicting presidential claims—threaten the apolitical character of the U.S. military that has been a cornerstone of American democracy for more than two centuries.

This analysis examines the documented facts of these dismissals, their implications for civil-military relations, national security effectiveness, and constitutional governance, and what these unprecedented actions reveal about the evolving relationship between civilian and military authority in the United States. The article draws on official government statements, news reports from multiple sources, congressional testimony, and analysis from former defense officials to provide a comprehensive assessment of a critical juncture in American military history.

Post
November 29, 2024November 29, 2025Disinformation, Freedom, History, Politics, Presidency, Religion

Doha to Kabul. How the 2020 U.S.–Taliban Agreement Set the Stage for Afghanistan’s Collapse

by

The collapse of Afghanistan in August 2021 is often framed as a singular failure of the Biden administration, but the record shows a far more complex lineage. Under the 2020 Doha Agreement, the Trump administration negotiated directly with the Taliban while excluding the Afghan government, committed to a rapid U.S. withdrawal without enforceable conditions, and orchestrated a dramatic reduction in American forces. These decisions—combined with the release of 5,000 Taliban prisoners, the closure of key U.S. airbases, and a refusal to share transition briefings with the incoming administration—left the United States with shrinking leverage and diminished capacity to execute a safe, orderly exit. This feature examines the documented diplomatic, military, and political choices that shaped the withdrawal trajectory, grounding each claim in primary-source evidence from inspector general reports, Pentagon testimony, and contemporaneous news accounts. The result is a clearer view of how policy choices made between 2018 and 2021 directly constrained the final months of the U.S. presence and shaped the outcome on the ground.