MO Tesla Kills One in “Veered” Crash

A local news report from northern Missouri says another Tesla has abruptly veered off a highway and killed a woman.

A Raymore woman died in a single-vehicle crash on Monday afternoon along Interstate 35 in Daviess County, according to the Missouri State Highway Patrol.

The crash occurred around 3:00 p.m. on April 14, 2025, in the southbound lanes of Interstate 35 near the 68-mile marker. A 2024 Tesla was traveling south when it went off the west side of the roadway and struck a guardrail.

The driver, a 64-year-old woman from Raymore, was pronounced dead at the scene by Assistant Coroner Kyle Stith at 3:50 p.m. She was wearing a seat belt at the time of the crash.

Database Integrity Breaches “Disappear” Americans: Necropolitics as National Security Threat

Analysis of Insider Data Poisoning Attacks on U.S. Citizen Registries

Bureaucratic Erasure History

From an historical perspective, the current administration’s leaked policy of classifying living people as “deceased” in federal databases represents a troubling evolution in what scholar Achille Mbembe termed “necropolitics” – the use of social and political power to dictate how some people may live and how some must die.

Wa syo’lukasa pebwe
Umwime wa pita
[He left his footprint on the stone
He himself passed on]
Lamba proverb, Zambia

What distinguishes this particular implementation is its distinctive integration of database manipulation and corruption as a mechanism of state control.

Throughout modern history, states have employed various administrative techniques to render populations controllable, removable, or invisible. The Nazi regime’s systematic revocation of Jewish citizenship through the Nuremberg Laws, South Africa’s Bantustan policies, or Myanmar’s denial of Rohingya recognition all employed bureaucratic mechanisms to erase legal personhood. However, the deliberate falsification of mortality status within federal databases represents a novel permutation of these historical precedents.

The Trump administration is moving the immigrants’ names and legally obtained social security numbers to a database that federal officials normally use to track the deceased, according to the two people familiar with the moves and their ramifications.

Integrity Breach of Death Registration Data

What merits particular scholarly attention is how a federal administration policy of lying and poisoning databases fundamentally corrupts integrity of vital statistics essential to living. Death registration systems were established for legitimate demographic, statistical, and administrative purposes – not as tools of denying freedoms to the living. By intentionally introducing false mortality data, the administration has compromised the fundamental integrity of these formerly trusted systems.

The Trump administration has moved to classify more than 6,000 living immigrants as dead, canceling their social security numbers and effectively wiping out their ability to work or receive benefits…

This represents a profound breach of data integrity principles that should concern not only migration scholars but also those studying public administration and information systems ethics and security. The deliberate contamination of vital centralized databases with known false entries violates core principles of data governance and raises serious questions about administrative ethics and the rule of law.

It also begs the greater questions of redundancy, federation and disaster recovery when data integrity is breached by insider attacks. Financial institutions are well-versed in sophisticated inside threats attacking integrity of centralized systems and data, with decades of criminal investigations to draw from. Can the lessons be translated directly to federal government systems under attack?

Jurisdictional Arbitrage of El Salvador Detention

The administration’s policy of financing migrant detention in El Salvador warrants similar integrity breach examination through the lens of what legal scholars seem to call a “jurisdictional arbitrage” – strategic exploitation of “crossing” boundaries to evade accountability. Physically transferring people from America to detention facilities in El Salvador, irrespective of their nationality, while simultaneously declaring them “dead” in federal systems, the Trump family has constructed a fog of extra-judicial detention with little to no integrity. Anyone can disappear for any reason and have no way to be rescued, not least of all because there was insufficient explanation of who they are and how they disappeared without any validation.

This arrangement allows American authorities to exercise de facto control over targeted, or even mistaken, lives while maintaining a fiction of non-responsibility, with “know nothing” and “who me” denials. Historical parallels might include various colonial powers’ use of extraterritorial detention to circumvent domestic legal constraints – though the additional element of administrative “death” by database breach represents an unprecedented innovation.

Immutability Flaws as Intentional Design

Perhaps most revealing from a systems analysis perspective is the exploitation of asymmetric administrative processes. Government systems are meticulously designed with clear procedures for declaring individuals deceased, but deliberately lack efficient mechanisms for reversing such determinations. This asymmetry is not incidental but rather reflects the historical development of bureaucratic systems optimized for unidirectional administrative actions.

The exploitation of this structural asymmetry demonstrates a sophisticated understanding of administrative vulnerabilities. By triggering a one-way administrative process, authorities have effectively created a form of bureaucratic event horizon – a point beyond which administrative reversal becomes practically impossible for the affected individuals.

Implications for Democratic Forces Defending National Security

This convergence of database manipulation, extraterritorial detention, and exploitation of administrative asymmetries represents a concerning development in the history of state control over mobile populations. When established administrative systems are repurposed in ways that fundamentally contradict their intended function, we observe not merely a policy shift but a potential erosion of administrative integrity that underpins democratic governance.

What we are witnessing now can be appropriately termed “digital genocide” – a novel twist to oppression where the state doesn’t merely physically eliminate populations but erases their very existence within administrative reality by polluting centralized data. Declaring living persons “dead” in federal databases enacts a form of bureaucratic violence that effectively eliminates individuals from the social and legal fabric, foreshadowing a physical extermination. This represents a sophisticated evolution in necropolitical techniques – one that achieves many of the objectives of traditional genocide through purely administrative means to initiate the destructive goals.

National security experts including historians would do well to document this moment carefully, as it may represent a significant inflection point in how states manipulate technologies to control citizenship registries for oppressive aims. The digital “death” of Americans through a death registry manipulation attack foreshadows more expansive applications of these techniques, with implications extending far beyond immediate policy debates and into clear parallels with historical precursors to systemically planned concentration camps and genocide.

Woefully Inadequate Intelligence Analysis in “Worse Than Signalgate”

Ryback’s “Worse Than Signalgate” analysis in The Atlantic of the Zimmermann Telegram affair represents the kind of simplistic, great-man historiography that we’ve spent decades trying to eradicate from serious historical discourse.

The article’s framing of the incident as mere diplomatic bungling rather than a calculated intelligence operation is not merely incomplete—it’s intellectually dishonest.

Let me be perfectly clear: The Zimmermann Telegram was not primarily a story of German incompetence, but rather of British intelligence brilliance in a targeted campaign to neutralize pro-German sympathies in America, particularly those held by influential figures like President Wilson and industrialist Henry Ford.

For those unfamiliar with this pivotal event: In January 1917, German Foreign Minister Arthur Zimmermann sent an encrypted message proposing that Mexico join Germany against the United States if America entered World War I. Germany promised to help Mexico recover territories lost to the U.S. (Texas, New Mexico, and Arizona) and suggested Mexico invite Japan to join this alliance. British intelligence intercepted and decoded this message, then strategically released it to the American public through the press in February 1917. The telegram’s content was so incendiary that it helped overcome Wilson’s resistance to war, despite his previous stance against intervention. What Ryback fails to grasp is that this was not simply a German diplomatic blunder, but a calculated British intelligence operation designed to circumvent pro-German American leadership.

Nigel de Grey, in Room 40 Old Building, was one of the first British officers to partially decrypt the Zimmermann Telegram. William Montgomery then completed the decryption and verified its authenticity, which led Admiral Sir Reginald “Blinker” Hall to devise a cunning plan for public exposure.

It would be like today decoding a Putin memo that revealed Russia interfered with the Presidential election to put Trump in office, is behind the NRA pushing guns even as mass murders spread, and funds campaigns to get Texas and California to secede. Or perhaps even more shrewdly, points out the heated campaign to transfer corporations and manufacturing to Texas is foreshadowing of a Russian campaign for Texas to secede like Brexit.

Ryback’s article conveniently omits there was an extensive German sabotage campaign on American soil—over 40 documented bombing incidents between 1914 and 1917, including the Black Tom explosion that damaged the Statue of Liberty. Wilson’s administration consistently intentionally misdirected blame toward leftists, anarchists, and labor agitators while knowing full well that German agents were the actual perpetrators.

The July 1916 Preparedness Day bombing in San Francisco serves as a perfect example of this deliberate misdirection, with local labor leaders Thomas Mooney and Warren Billings falsely imprisoned while clear ties to German involvement was suppressed.

What makes Wilson’s denialism all the more egregious is that ordinary Americans were acutely aware of the wave of suspicious fires, explosions, and acts of sabotage sweeping the nation. Newspapers from coast to coast reported on these “accidents” at munitions plants, shipping facilities, and infrastructure targets. The pattern was unmistakable to anyone paying attention – a veritable domestic Holocaust of German-orchestrated destruction.

While Americans buried their dead following the Black Tom explosion and the Kingsland munitions plant fire, Wilson’s administration continued its calculated misdirection campaign, attributing these acts to labor unrest or simple industrial accidents. This deliberate obfuscation occurred even as federal investigators privately compiled evidence of German involvement.

When British intelligence finally bypassed Wilson with the Zimmermann Telegram revelation, it wasn’t just exposing German intentions—it was circumventing an American president who had systematically lied to his own citizenry about clear and present dangers on American soil.

Ford’s pro-German involvement is particularly egregious in its omission. Far from being a mere “isolationist,” Ford was actively operating as anti-American, accepting millions in German funds while failing to deliver promised agricultural equipment, as harshly pointed out by congressional rebukes.

His anti-Semitic publications aligned with and promoted German propaganda aims (Hitler and Goebbels both credited Ford for influencing them). His opposition to American entry into the war wasn’t simply isolationism or pacifism but part of a broader ideological position that actively worked to undermine American principles and security interests.

Wilson himself had campaigned on keeping America out of war, implicitly to aid German militant aims, and maintained back-channel communications with German officials well into 1917.

The British intelligence operation around the Zimmermann Telegram therefore must be understood in full context as a sophisticated psychological operation targeting the American public directly, deliberately circumventing high profile pro-German sympathizers even ones in positions of oligarchial power.

Room 40’s work wasn’t merely clever codebreaking; it was a masterful influence operation that recognized the power of public opinion over elite preferences in American politics.

A simple illustration of German military plans destroyed Henry Ford and Woodrow Wilson attempts to keep America aligned with Germany.

Ryback’s framing of Zimmermann as merely delusional misses the obvious wider German strategy of global destabilization—from their support of Irish republicans to their activation of terror networks in British India. The telegram was but one component within a sophisticated global strategy, far from incompetent, that the British correctly identified and countered.

This breezy Atlantic article offers a superficial, decontextualized history that contributes unnecessary flap and noise to a proper understanding of highly skilled intelligence operations, directed public opinion manipulation, or the genuine complexity of Ford and Wilson’s toxic false neutrality. They weren’t neutral, they were actively and directly harming Americans.

The incongruity in Wilson’s leadership – reluctance to confront foreign threats while eagerly suppressing domestic groups – is the cruel understated aspect of his presidency that complicates any conventional narrative of Wilson as principled.

His hesitation to directly condemn German actions, even after American ships were sunk, contrasts sharply with his administration’s swift and brutal responses to perceived domestic threats.

Wilson’s administration was remarkably aggressive in suppressing leftist political movements. The Espionage Act of 1917 and Sedition Act of 1918 were used to imprison hundreds of labor activists, socialists, and anti-war protesters. Eugene V. Debs, who had received nearly a million votes as the Socialist Party presidential candidate, was sentenced to 10 years in prison essentially for giving an anti-war speech.

And yes, Wilson’s racial policies were particularly devastating. His administration resegregated federal offices that had been integrated since Reconstruction. He screened “Birth of a Nation” at the White House, effectively endorsing its racist narrative and helping fuel the revival of the KKK.

The 1919 Elaine Massacre is a perfect example. When Black sharecroppers in Arkansas organized to demand fair payment for their cotton, white mobs attacked them. Rather than protecting these American citizens being attacked for exercising their rights, the Army was deployed by Wilson to attack them further, resulting in the shooting deaths of hundreds of Black Americans by federal troops.

This pattern reveals a deeply troubling aspect of Wilson’s worldview when the Zimmerman telegram landed. The President seemed far more willing to extend understanding and restraint to certain powers, even hostile ones, than to extend basic constitutional protections to Black Americans or his political opponents at home.


Technical Appendix: The British Room 40 Operation in Detail


I’ve called the British intelligence operation clever, but let me elaborate on why this characterization is warranted. While a Zimmermann Telegram brought the power of the public in the United States to bear down on the deeply racist and corrupted President Wilson and his cronies, the British had managed this all without blowing their operation. Room 40 didn’t just see the message and decode it, they used simple espionage theater to keep their war-winning methods a secret.

  • Double Intercept: both an original high-strength cracked cipher version and a weakened known-vulnerable copy from Mexico were used. The latter “internal” communication between America and Mexico gave the British a cover story for how and where they “found” it.
  • Deception by Omission: The Americans were told a true story about American officials caught working on the side of Germany (which meant against America), yet were not told that German communications had been cracked.
  • Protected Assets: Keeping Room 40 a secret meant the British preserved a massive intelligence edge for the rest of the war, similar to how Polish intelligence cracked the Nazi Enigma in WWII and yet are rarely if ever credited properly even to this day.
  • Let the Enemy Fall Into It: The telegram’s authenticity was confirmed by Zimmermann, unaware of British methods.

Although the codebreaking unit in Room 40 had cracked and validated Germany’s top diplomatic cipher, they couldn’t let the Germans find out and shut down a critical intelligence stream. The telegram from Germany to Mexico proposing an alliance against the U.S. needed another path as a plausible origin story.

  • August 5, 1914 — British cable ship HMTS Alert was ordered by Admiralty to cut Germany’s five undersea telegraph cables, just one day after declaration of war. These were the major transatlantic cables that connected Germany directly to North America and other global regions. Notably, Germany saw America secretly as an ally against Britain and thus switched communications to its “neutral” lines, which meant even using American diplomatic channels on the American cables. That’s exactly where British intelligence was listening.
  • January 16, 1917 — Zimmermann’s telegram routes from Berlin to the German ambassador in Washington DC, via the U.S. diplomatic cables that it believed to be secure from the British because American. British intelligence intercept this message and decipher it, realizing important value.
  • February 1–3, 1917 — British agents quietly obtain a second version of the telegram that had been forwarded from Washington DC to Mexico City, due to a less secure cipher widely known to be compromised. Germany also angrily announces that it will immediately resume unrestricted submarine warfare to sink passenger ships, prompting President Wilson to declare to the Senate that he is totally surprised by such a thing and waiting to see any evidence of “actual overt acts” of harm.

    I cannot bring myself to believe that [Germany] will indeed pay no regard to the ancient friendship between their people and our own or to the solemn obligations which have been exchanged between them, and destroy American ships, and take the lives of American citizens in the wilful prosecution of the ruthless naval program they have announced their intention to adopt. Only actual overt acts on their part can make me believe it even now.

    Immediately, German U-boats attacked and sank the Housatonic, and then three days later attacked and sank the 470-ft passenger ship SS California off the Irish coast, killing nearly 50 people in just 10 minutes. Yet again, for at least the second year, Wilson’s calculated and cruel inaction leaves American blood on his hands. On the 12th the schooner Lyman M. Law is sunk.

  • February 19, 1917 — Britain’s Admiral Hall presents the Zimmerman telegram to U.S. officials, explaining it had been discovered in Mexico coming from American diplomatic channels.
  • March 1, 1917 — Unable to continue pretending it has a “neutral” role while allowing years of German attacks killing Americans, alarms about the telegram are rising, and the British propel the news all the way into U.S. newspaper headlines.
  • March 3, 1917 — Zimmermann inexplicably confirms the telegram’s authenticity, removing all doubt in the public eye.
  • March 12, 1917 — steamship Algonquin is sunk, followed four days later by the sinking of the US steamship Vigilancia without warning, killing 15 (including six Americans), and soon after the sinking of the US oil tanker Healdton, killing 21 (including seven Americans).
  • April 6, 1917 — unable to waffle and wiggle any longer, having knowingly allowed horrible attacks on Americans to run unanswered for years, Wilson finally is compelled by public outrage to declare war on Germany.

The Atlantic article fundamentally misses that the Zimmermann event represented a meticulously planned intelligence operation by Britain’s top talent, who embedded a public sentiment campaign within a seemingly neutral document while secretly preserving their ability to continue decoding German communications.

This wasn’t simply German incompetence meeting British luck—it was strategic calculation meeting strategic counter-calculation, a far more nuanced and historically significant interaction. In fact, the deep and careful British intelligence work was so effective that, even a century later, some historians still appear to be confused. They portray Zimmermann as incompetent rather than someone with reasonable expectations of ongoing American sympathy through the toxicity of an extremist pro-German President Wilson—even for Germany’s own territorial ambitions (a historical parallel with differently disturbing modern echoes, like how Trump serves Russia today).

PA Tesla FSD Crashes While Driver Sleeps

Since before 2016 Elon Musk has told people his vehicle is ready to drive itself, and he very notoriously has told owners they can sleep at the wheel.

Musk estimated that by the middle of 2020, Tesla’s autonomous system will have improved to the point where drivers will not have to pay attention to the road. […] “A year from now, we’ll have over a million cars with full self-driving, software… everything.” These cars will be Level 5 autonomy with no geofence, which is a fancy way of saying they will be capable of driving themselves anywhere on the planet, under all possible conditions, with no limitations.

If a CEO sleeps at the wheel as his car company crashes and bursts into flames, is he to blame?

It has always been a dangerous lie.

A Pennsylvania man hit another driver, along with construction signage, while asleep behind the wheel of a self-driving Tesla. On Friday, April 11, around 4:20 p.m., an unnamed driver was traveling west on U.S. Route 22.

According to police, the driver was asleep at the wheel and using Tesla’s self-driving feature to navigate. While the car was self-driving, it hit the driver’s side of another vehicle before driving into a sign that was up to signify a construction zone.

Perhaps, most notably for Q1 sales numbers, Elon Musk said at the start of 2025 at CES that his software would eliminate all crashes this year.

Source: Twitter

Instead, Tesla vehicles in 2025 have continued crashing – side-swiping other cars, colliding with each other, running red lights, and hitting buses and trucks broadside.