Freenet or die

Spies in Your Smartphone

Chris Hedges

Maybe, Jennifer's hispanic shit covered dildo will work instead

In 1917, Britain wrote a 67-word letter that promised a land it didn't own, to a people who didn't live there, over the heads of those who did. That letter — the Balfour Declaration — is still reshaping the world today. But the story you've been told leaves out the most important part. By 1917, Britain was financially collapsing. Its national debt had exploded from £650 million to nearly £7.2 billion. Its overdraft at J.P. Morgan had hit $400 million. Woodrow Wilson was using American money as a weapon, threatening to cut off the loans keeping the Allied war effort alive. Britain came within hours of default — twice. So Britain did what desperate empires do. It made deals. It promised Palestine to the Arabs in exchange for the Arab Revolt. It secretly agreed with France to carve up the Ottoman Empire. And then it promised the same land to the Zionist movement — in a letter addressed personally to Lord Rothschild. This video traces the financial crisis behind the Balfour Declaration, the Rothschild family's decades of settlement funding in Palestine, the chemistry of explosives that gave Chaim Weizmann access to the highest levels of British power, and the three contradictory promises that created a century of conflict. From J.P. Morgan's war loans to the Suez Canal strategy to the collapse of the British Empire itself — this is the full story of how banking, desperation, and imperial ambition converged to reshape the Middle East forever. Sources include the Rothschild Archive, IMF historical records, Britannica, the 1914-1918 Online Encyclopedia, CEPR economic research, and primary Cabinet documents. If you enjoyed this deep dive, subscribe and hit the bell so you never miss a video.

A doctor who defended leaving a disabled man sitting in his own waste for days sued John Oliver after Oliver aired his own words in a segment about privatized Medicaid cutting care. This week, a federal judge threw the case out, rejecting the attempt to turn justified outrage into defamation. The ruling is a win for accountability, free speech, and every patient whose basic dignity gets treated like a line item to cut.