26 Comments
User's avatar
Phil Hammond's avatar

Please check the reviews for Crowd Health and you will find a lot of people dissatisfied with the declined payment status which is no so rosy as you represent.

Beware and check it out.

wilson's avatar

have to figure that everything would be a fraud and a lie. Designed to take your money. Using the realistic fear of being bankrupted by medical bills.

I read recently that something like 640, 000 people in the US have filed for bankruptcy because of "medical care". I don't remember the time period.

What happened to bongo care anyway? Wasn't that supposed to prevent this?

Nod's avatar

Who thinks that profit motive and medical care should be partners in crime? The rich get richer, they impoverish the rest. And no money because the rich is stealing it all. Fluoride neurotoxins for the win. Where o where did the real men go ?

VICTORIASPANGLER6591's avatar

Joe Kent probably should have never been in that position. Obviously he made a big disgraceful decision to come against the President not to mention the men in military. No one could possibly NOT know the threat America and many countries have had from these terrorist that hate us. Including the ones living here in our cities which do not hide their hatred and total disregard for this country.

Leskunque Lepew's avatar

Those countries have no energy resources. The US does.

TomL's avatar
Mar 18Edited

Tulsi Gabbard said the same thing as Joe Kent last year about Iran not being a threat and she's been kept out of press conferences but she is scheduled to talk soon--it will be interesting what she says.

All of Andrew Napolitano's guests have been saying the same thing about the Iran war--a big mistake and Iran was never a threat, let alone a nuclear threat.

This guy is popular on Zero Hedge for technical analysis: https://substack.com/@no01/p-191020486

With the vaccines, in prior rulings judges all said that the CDC and the NIH are the authority so judges cannot interfere with their decisions. This judge will probably be overuled on appeal.

STH's avatar

Maybe maybe not? I no longer trust any of the opinions presented as news from the sources that lied about literally everything the last 6 years. 🤷‍♀️

Elaine Seinfeld's avatar

so is THE VIGILANT FOX now just this gals videos/writing? she's insufferable

James Kringlee's avatar

"imminent threat to the United States" - some would wait until they saw the mushroom cloud

By 2025 it had become obvious that the regime in Iran had progressed to the point that it had the "at will" capability to produce both the weapons grade enriched uranium and the nuclear bomb components it needed to assemble city killing size nuclear bombs - at which point the regime in Iran kicked the International Atomic Energy Agency out of Iran.

"Iran has failed to provide the co-operation required under its Safeguards Agreement, ..." "IAEA Board of Governors NPT Safeguards Agreement with the Islamic Republic of Iran Resolution adopted on 12 June 2025 during the 1769th session" see below*

The iran regime's imminent threat then - smuggle nuclear bombs into the US to blow up New York City and Washington DC or load them into their existing missiles and attack Israel or continue its vast missile building and nuclear bomb work to then possess the ability to mount overwhelming Death to America / Death to Israel nuclear attacks.

The regime in Iran sealed its fate and brought much death and destruction into Iran when they kicked the IAEA out of Iran and stonewalled and refused to capitulate during either round of final negotiations - as would be expected with their Death to America / Death to Israel reason for being.

*The Board of Governors,

(a) Commending the continued professional, independent and impartial efforts of the IAEA

Director General and the Secretariat, including its inspectors, to implement Iran’s NPT

Safeguards Agreement and to resolve the long outstanding Safeguards issues in Iran,

(b) Emphasizing the essential and independent role of the IAEA in verifying Iran’s compliance

with its NPT Safeguards obligations,

(c) Stressing the imperative nature of Iran’s compliance with its Safeguards obligations and

the importance of Iran cooperating fully and in a timely manner with the Agency with a view to

clarifying and resolving the long outstanding Safeguards issues detailed in the Director General’s

report GOV/2025/25 and in several prior reports,

(d) Recalling the Board of Governors’ resolutions of 19 June 2020 contained in GOV/2020/34,

of 8 June 2022 contained in GOV/2022/34, of 17 November 2022 contained in GOV/2022/70, of

5 June 2024 contained in GOV/2024/39, and of 21 November 2024 contained in GOV/2024/68,

which called upon Iran to fully cooperate with the Agency and decided that it is essential and

urgent, in order to ensure verification of the non-diversion of nuclear material, that Iran act to

fulfil its legal obligations and, with a view to clarifying all outstanding issues, take all specified

actions without delay,

(e) Regretting that despite the above resolutions by the Board and numerous opportunities

provided by the Director General since 2019, Iran has failed to provide the co-operation required

under its Safeguards Agreement, impeding Agency verification activities, sanitizing locations,

and repeatedly failing to provide the Agency with technically credible explanations for the

presence of uranium particles of anthropogenic origin at several undeclared locations in Iran or

information on the current location(s) of nuclear material and/or of contaminated equipment,

Derestricted 12 June 2025

(This document has been derestricted at the meeting of the Board on 12 June 2025)

page 1 of 4

Nod's avatar
Mar 18Edited

What a load of horseshit this is.

"What the argument does:

Takes a real compliance problem and uses it to retroactively justify whatever was done to Iran — without specifying what was done, by whom, under what legal authority, with what outcome for Iranian civilians.

The nuclear monopoly problem Kringlee ignores entirely:

The United States is the only nation in history to deploy nuclear weapons against a civilian population. Twice. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were not military targets in the conventional sense — they were cities. That is not contested history. It is the foundational act of nuclear warfare.

Israel possesses an estimated 90 nuclear warheads, has never signed the NPT, has never submitted to IAEA inspection, and operates outside every safeguard framework it demands of others. This is not disputed — it is official non-disclosure policy known as nuclear ambiguity. The same IAEA framework Kringlee cites as justification against Iran has zero jurisdiction over Israel by Israel's own design.

The enforcement consistency test:

If IAEA non-compliance justifies military action, the framework must apply uniformly. It does not. India — not NPT signatory, nuclear armed — receives civilian nuclear cooperation agreements with the U.S. Pakistan — nuclear armed, proliferation record including A.Q. Khan network supplying North Korea, Libya, Iran — receives military aid. Israel — undeclared arsenal, zero inspections — receives unconditional defense guarantees.

The principle being invoked against Iran is selectively enforced. Selective enforcement of a principle is not a principle. It is a targeting mechanism dressed as one.

The "imminent threat" construction:

Kringlee's framing — "some would wait until they saw the mushroom cloud" — is word-for-word the pre-Iraq War rhetorical structure Condoleezza Rice used in 2002: "We don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud." That framing was used to justify a war on a country that had no weapons of mass destruction. The rhetorical DNA is identical. That is not coincidence — it is a proven template for manufacturing consent for preemptive action.

The bottom line:

Iran's IAEA non-compliance is real and documentable. It does not establish possession of a weapon. It does not establish intent to deploy against the U.S. It does not establish that military action was the only or proportionate response. And it does not address the foundational double standard under which the argument operates — that nuclear non-proliferation is a rule for some countries and not others, enforced by the only country that has actually used the weapons on civilians.

Kringlee's argument is: Iran broke the rules. The rules only apply to countries we decide they apply to. Therefore whatever happened to Iran was justified.

That is not a legal or strategic argument. It is tribalism with an IAEA citation attached.

— Nod | Free Thinker, Pattern Seeker, Keeper of Birds, Breaker of Bots

— Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Dialectical Mirror

Many Americans are mentally ill with the lust for blood.

"

James Kringlee's avatar

Iran nuclear: IAEA inspectors find uranium particles enriched to 83.7%

1 March 2023

Bethany Bell & David Gritten BBC News, in Vienna and London

Kevin Beck's avatar

Classified briefing: Another way of saying "Trust us; we know what's best for you." Call me a skeptic: I don't trust those any way, any how.

Since when did Boston judges become medical experts, just because they are in Boston? Another case of "Trust us."

The last story is self-explanatory in its repulsiveness.

Nod's avatar

People don't seem to get it. The globalist own business, they own government, they own politicians, they own the judiciary.

"The U.S. attacked a country that had no nuclear weapons, using the threat of nuclear weapons as justification, while maintaining unconditional support for an undeclared nuclear state that has never submitted to a single inspection.

That is not a foreign policy inconsistency. It is a pattern. The law is invoked when it is useful and discarded when it is not. The targets are selected before the justification is constructed. The justification is then reverse-engineered to fit the target.

Iraq 2003. Libya 2011. The Iran pressure campaign. The throughline is not nuclear non-proliferation. The throughline is elimination of independent regional power centers that resist economic and military integration into the U.S.-led order.

The only nation to commit nuclear mass murder is lecturing the world on nuclear proliferation while arming and shielding an undeclared nuclear state called Israel. That is the sentence that contains the entire argument.

— Nod | Free Thinker, Pattern Seeker, Keeper of Birds, Breaker of Bots

— Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Dialectical Mirror

Synickel's avatar

I'm amazed at the comments on how many Koolaid drinkers there are. Perhaps there are so many because they are the paid zionist trolls. Gotta remember that commenters that are warmongers are often bought and paid for by them.

Synickel's avatar

Everything involved with fuel and pricing is a scam, like most other gov meddling. There is plenty of fuel available for a long planetary life. There are extremely productive wells that have been capped so that oil companies could claim shortages and keep prices high, and tax income for the gov would be high to feed the hogs at their trough too.

Joe Blog's avatar

Yes Iran was a threat to Israel & also those countries surrounding Iran as well as the majority of citizens in Iran who were & are calling for an end to the Dictatorship.

DrLatusDextro's avatar

Given the OZzzz and NZzzz GOVs seem captured and retained thoroughly in the thrall of the globalists and other supranational entities, watching what their GOVs do and the way in which they act appears a litmus test of coercive compliance.

Sadly, the populace in these nations seems arguably among the most compliant on Earth, obsessively rule driven, over-taxed and over-governed by multiples of bureaucratic low wattage parasitic meddlers.

The likely way being driven forward by the Parasites-Who-Claim-To-Own-The-World, (together with Canada, the UK and South Africa) may help illuminate the current trajectory.

The Agenda 2030 goal of destitution, delegitimisation, depopulation, deindustrialisation, dependency and death appears a collection of ambitions playing out in the current Iranian charade.

We all move ever closer to the withdrawal of social license and submission government.

After all, there would appear to be nothing left to lose.

Randie Walton's avatar

Joe’s new wife? I thought his wife died. Thought that might be why he’s pissed off., he didn’t belong in this party. There’s more to this story.

Allie's avatar

You forgot to mention who Joe Kent’s new wife is. I think that partially explains the content of his letter.

Lesha's avatar

The divide isn't there. You should have done more research before posting that about Joe Kent.