Demetri Kofinas
@kofinas • 40,711 subscribers
I get you access to the people & ideas that matter so that you can learn to build financial wealth and always stay ahead of the curve | Host of @HiddenForcesPod
Videos
I can tell almost instantly when I meet a young man or woman, whether he or she is a deep thinker. They may not be at the top of their class, but that doesn’t necessarily make them less intelligent than the kid who scored 1500 on his SAT or the guy with an IQ of 134. They may be more intelligent. Much more intelligent, but the methods we have for quantifying that intelligence do not adequately capture the breadth and depth of brilliant minds that exist in the world. So they go unrecognized while the kids who excel on answer-based examinations get the best grades, attend the best schools, earn the best degrees, and, more often than not, go on to have mediocre lives. Why? There is one thing that the most brilliant and accomplished people I have ever met all share in common, and it isn’t pedigree or IQ. It’s curiosity. And not just any curiosity—it’s the inexhaustible kind. It’s the kind that will never be satisfied. In my experience, this is the sort of curiosity that breeds humility and most often coincides with a questions-based mindset. And it’s this type of mindset, not the answers-based mindset our educational system selects for, that is the actual prerequisite for brilliance. I’ve seen this kind of brilliance in physical therapists, plumbers, and pretty much any profession you can imagine that we don’t typically associate with brilliance. But we do associate it with excellence. And that’s because to become excellent at something, you have to become your own teacher. This means going from learning how to give the right answers to learning how to ask the right questions. And that requires curiosity and an almost psychotic commitment to excellence. So, while the person in this video is correct that less intelligent people than he are far more successful than he has been, the more interesting and less remarked upon insight is that people like him are not as brilliant as the system tells us they are.
Demetri Kofinas76,334 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад
The Cover Up: It is a fact that the 9/11 Commission engaged in a cover-up, and several of its members have said so on the record for more than a decade. But what exactly is being covered up? WTC Building 7: A 47-story building collapsing onto itself because of residual fires and structural damage might seem implausible at first glance, but if the building had been rigged with explosives then why were there no signature outward explosions like you would see in other controlled demolitions and why did the collapse look different from other examples? Also, if the building had been detonated, it would have been the largest and tallest building ever brought down by explosives (even today), and it would have had to be rigged over weeks if not months in absolute secrecy. Insider Trading: Just as with the collapse of WTC 7, the options trading activity on American Arlines (AMR) and United Airlines (UAL) stock in the days leading up to the 9/11 attacks may seem damning at first glance, but is it really? Here are four points to consider: (1) According to the 9/11 commission’s own report, a single U.S.-based institutional investor with “no conceivable ties to al Qaeda” purchased 95 percent of the UAL puts on September 6 as part of a trading strategy that also included BUYING 115,000 shares of AMR on September 10 (worth ~$3.4 million on the morning of 9/11). (2) Similarly, much of the seemingly suspicious trading in AMR on September 10 (resulting in an unusually high put/call ratio of 6.09) was traced to a specific U.S.-based options trading newsletter, faxed to its subscribers on Sunday, September 9, which recommended these trades. It is also worth noting that exactly one month later on November 12th, American Airlines Flight 587 crashed shortly after taking off from JFK, killing all 251 passengers and 9 crew on board. Three days before that crash the put/call ratio on American Airlines’ parent company was nearly 8. So how unusual is 6.09 really and why wasn't this crash also an example of insider trading? (3) Furthermore, the purchasing of stock options does not itself imply a directional bet. More often than not, options are used as part of a hedging strategy, so simply noticing that a company or individual has taken out a short position on a company does not itself imply that his or her portfolio will benefit financially if the stock falls and certainly not by the amount implied from the options purchase alone. (4) Lastly, it was reported by Bloomberg News on September 20, 2001 that insurance companies saw anomalous trading activities as well ahead of the attacks. Specifically, Citigroup Inc., which had estimated that its Travelers insurance unit would potentially have to pay $500 million in claims from the attacks, had about 45 times the normal volume during three trading days before the attack for options that profit if the stock falls below $40. Citigroup shares did indeed fall slightly below that target. While the options trading on AMR and UAL seem less likely to have been insider trading given the explanations provided and the easy traceability of the trades, the multi-step trade on Citigroup’s share warrants a better explanation IMO. That said, one may have already been provided, in which case, the public should be made aware of what it is if that hasn't already happened. What is Being Covered Up? While I’ve reviewed a decent amount of material on 9/11 in the last 24 years and spoken with many primary sources, the best book I can recommend that provides a more believable explanation for the nature and intentions behind some of the cover up can be found in Ray Nowosielski’s and John Duffy’s “The Watchdogs Didn't Bark”. Both authors appeared on the Hidden Forces podcast last September, as has former 9/11 commission member senator Senator Bob Kerry in 2018 and again in 2024. I should also mention that while the authors are well-intentioned, intelligent, and caring people, I’ve also received critical feedback about their interpretation of the facts from people who are in a position to know, muddying my confidence in event their own explanations. This said, it is clear that there was a cover up and that the cover up extends to the CIA and to the Saudi Royal family, but how benign the explanation may be will probably never be known conclusively. Concluding Thoughts If history is any guide, 9/11 is one of many historical events about which endless information will be reproduced, almost entirely in the form of fiction to feed an insatiable demand by the public for meaning-making and entertainment. The more interesting (and answerable) question to me, as someone who lived a mere 15-min walking distance from the twin towers on that day is why after so many years has this topic and others like it been elevated to the highest levels of public consciousness in my lifetime? I have a thoughtful answer, which is informed not only by my investigations into the subject, but also by my own life experience having been black-pilled in the early 2000s on this topic, knowing many of the early players involved in unearthing its details, and having been the creator and producer of a popular daily news program on Russia Today, on which much of today’s most popular right-wing programming would fit perfectly. If I had the time, I would write it all down, and maybe I will one day or perhaps record a podcast series on it. I'd like to, because we are living through the most profound cultural and political revolutions in American history and I don't know how many people truly understand how far back (and where) it all leads...
Demetri Kofinas30,766 просмотров • 9 месяцев назад
Remember when the CEO of United Healthcare Brian Thompson was murdered and young people were quick to paint him as a villain? Millions of young people with little life experience confronting tragedy and violence, but with lots of time spent watching gruesome videos online probably lack the capacity to empathize with Charlie or his now widowed wife and fatherless children. I don't have any comments to make about this man's politics. I can't say I paid much attention to what he had to say. But watching the video of his cold blooded murder was horrifying. This girl mentions Charlie's position on Gaza as justification for her indifference to his murder. I don't think his life is worth more or less than the life of a child in Gaza. And yet, the video of his murder upset me more than all the videos of men, women, and children getting bombed to death outside hospitals or while waiting on line at food distribution centers. That's probably because I've seen so many videos of his cross my screen for years that I feel as though I know him, whereas children being bombed outside aid centers blur into each other, and the more that die, the less I feel. I don't know how to feel about any of this anymore. There's this uncanny detachment that comes from watching scenes of mediated violence, perhaps not unlike that of television. The main difference is that when millions of Americans saw the planes hit the buildings on 9/11 we lived in a more communal society that wasn't actively tearing each other apart. What stops this train? It won't be more violence. I think it has to be collective suffering and that doesn't make me feel too good.
Demetri Kofinas12,456 просмотров • 10 месяцев назад
What people don't appreciate is that what's maintained the international system and the US position in that system are the middle powers as principal stakeholders, and that's because they perceive the current system as the best one for them. If their perception of America's role and its intentions changes, then the U.S. no longer has a great argument for why these middle powers should support them on different issues. America then becomes just another powerful state; the most powerful state, but one that is both pursuing interests and is using its power more coercively, which you've seen at least in the last month. And so very quickly, we will begin to generate antibodies in the system and coalitions against us on different issues. And we will quickly discover that the reason why the system has endured, why unipolarity has endured and why America's position has endured, is not because we have so many carrier strike groups; it's not because of military power. It's because most countries, although they publicly don't like to admit it, are stakeholders in the system and they see it as the best system for them compared to a bipolar or a multipolar world order. That's the reality. Usually when they say multi polar world order, what they mean is one that's more multilateral with greater room, greater opportunities for smaller states and middle powers. And that's fair. But what they don't mean is that they're all staying up at night and saying, you know, we wish that Saudi Arabia, Russia, maybe Iran and Turkey had a lot more power than they do right now. Because if you ask who would be the powers in the multipolar world system, it's usually not the countries that people want. And so, this kind of will be my closing argument that I think some folks in the U. S. are very short sighted and misunderstand the genuine sources of U. S. power and our position and what keeps it in the international order and what maintains it. And if you pull that thread, you will quickly start unraveling something and you will have an epiphany afterwards on what the order is really based on. — Michael Kofman
Demetri Kofinas16,844 просмотров • 1 год назад
Больше нет контента для загрузки