Sensitive content

This media may contain sensitive content.

Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

Go Home

A Hispanic, white, and black guy walk into a bathroom…let’s see where it goes from there 😏😏 WATCH MORE: #gooner #bator #riskybator #publicbator #public #risky #taboo #gaytaboo #gooch #feet #cum #cumshot #blackmen #exhibitionist #chudai #batorbros #bigdick #thickdick #gooning #bbc #wataa #bigblackdick #cumming #exhib

jayycruise's profile picture

Cruising With Jayy

48,302 subscribers

305,800 views • 7 days ago •via X (Twitter)

NSFW#gooner#bator#riskybator#publicbator#public#risky#taboo#gaytaboo#gooch#feet#cum#cumshot#blackmen#exhibitionist#chudai#batorbros
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

Mathieu Kassovitz on why 'La Haine' (1995) would have been horrible had it been in colour instead of Black & White: "Interviewer: Was it essential that it was three kids? Kassovitz: I needed a trio because when you’re with a friend, you have a discussion, and it ends fast because either you agree, or you don’t, but you cannot argue all the time. Three people can disagree all the time because it bounces from one to the other. I wanted one guy that’s the funny one in the middle; the political one that wants to get even with the society; and then the other one who’s trying to hold it in because he knows what real violence is. It was a trick, like the black and white is a trick too – to make it universal, a story that happens everywhere, so you don’t know if it’s Paris or Mexico or Brooklyn: it could be anywhere. Interviewer: How does black and white make it more universal? Kassovitz: When you look at black-and-white footage from the war, it changes when you see that footage put in colour. I did the voiceover for 'Apocalypse', a fantastic documentary series covering wars, for which they colourised all these black-and-white images and rendered them in HD. In colour, all of a sudden the footage becomes very personal – you see your grandfathers there, it’s not just ghosts or an artistic image, it could be today. What black and white does is bring poetry into reality. That’s why when you do a movie about poverty where you don’t have control over the environment and things are supposed to be ugly, it’s very difficult. It costs a lot of money to make it look good. But it doesn’t cost anything to make it look good in black and white. If I showed you 'La Haine' in colour, it’s horrible." (Mathieu Kassovitz's interview with Kaleem Aftab, BFI, 2020)
1:26

Mathieu Kassovitz on why 'La Haine' (1995) would have been horrible had it been in colour instead of Black & White: "Interviewer: Was it essential that it was three kids? Kassovitz: I needed a trio because when you’re with a friend, you have a discussion, and it ends fast because either you agree, or you don’t, but you cannot argue all the time. Three people can disagree all the time because it bounces from one to the other. I wanted one guy that’s the funny one in the middle; the political one that wants to get even with the society; and then the other one who’s trying to hold it in because he knows what real violence is. It was a trick, like the black and white is a trick too – to make it universal, a story that happens everywhere, so you don’t know if it’s Paris or Mexico or Brooklyn: it could be anywhere. Interviewer: How does black and white make it more universal? Kassovitz: When you look at black-and-white footage from the war, it changes when you see that footage put in colour. I did the voiceover for 'Apocalypse', a fantastic documentary series covering wars, for which they colourised all these black-and-white images and rendered them in HD. In colour, all of a sudden the footage becomes very personal – you see your grandfathers there, it’s not just ghosts or an artistic image, it could be today. What black and white does is bring poetry into reality. That’s why when you do a movie about poverty where you don’t have control over the environment and things are supposed to be ugly, it’s very difficult. It costs a lot of money to make it look good. But it doesn’t cost anything to make it look good in black and white. If I showed you 'La Haine' in colour, it’s horrible." (Mathieu Kassovitz's interview with Kaleem Aftab, BFI, 2020)

DepressedBergman

79,263 views • 7 months ago

‼️NEW UNSEEN FOOTAGE: From Charlie's Security Team From That Day, “Rally In The Bathroom” — Then The Man Carrying Charlie’s Head Said He Didn’t Know If He'd Been Shot 👀 Unseen footage from Charlie’s own detail just dropped. In the chaos you hear one of them cut through it: rally in the bathroom. Not “secure the scene.” Not “get him in the truck.” Bathroom. That is a huddle. That is a story meeting. Then a girl on the recording asks the obvious question of the guy who had Charlie’s head in his hands and the most blood on his clothes: was he shot in the neck. His answer is “I don’t know.” That answer does not belong to that man at that second. He is the one who felt the wound. He is the one who saw where the blood was coming from. “I don’t know” only makes sense if they were not ready to lock themselves into a story yet— if the thing on Charlie did not do what they expected and they needed a minute before the line went public. That's why they needed to rally in the bathroom. Watch the sequence. The question comes first. The huddle comes after. Separate clip, same day: a man in a black shirt with a skull on the back and tan pants walking backwards behind the cops walking George Zinn to the car. He palmed something square into his pocket. He seems like he already knows Charlie’s security guys. He also has the same build and face that line up with the wider figure in the raw, unstretched parking-garage tape Candace released — the version the court file squeezed until it looked more like Tyler Robinson. More on that match in a later post. For now watch the video, play the audio. You decide if that seems suspicious. FOLLOW my amazing researcher KK ⚠️As you guys know this is now day 11 of no monetization. Now more than ever we rely on the support of our community to keep the Charlie Kirk investigation alive. If you value our work and want to support us, you can click the link in the post below to donate to our fundraiser. 👇
0:26

‼️NEW UNSEEN FOOTAGE: From Charlie's Security Team From That Day, “Rally In The Bathroom” — Then The Man Carrying Charlie’s Head Said He Didn’t Know If He'd Been Shot 👀 Unseen footage from Charlie’s own detail just dropped. In the chaos you hear one of them cut through it: rally in the bathroom. Not “secure the scene.” Not “get him in the truck.” Bathroom. That is a huddle. That is a story meeting. Then a girl on the recording asks the obvious question of the guy who had Charlie’s head in his hands and the most blood on his clothes: was he shot in the neck. His answer is “I don’t know.” That answer does not belong to that man at that second. He is the one who felt the wound. He is the one who saw where the blood was coming from. “I don’t know” only makes sense if they were not ready to lock themselves into a story yet— if the thing on Charlie did not do what they expected and they needed a minute before the line went public. That's why they needed to rally in the bathroom. Watch the sequence. The question comes first. The huddle comes after. Separate clip, same day: a man in a black shirt with a skull on the back and tan pants walking backwards behind the cops walking George Zinn to the car. He palmed something square into his pocket. He seems like he already knows Charlie’s security guys. He also has the same build and face that line up with the wider figure in the raw, unstretched parking-garage tape Candace released — the version the court file squeezed until it looked more like Tyler Robinson. More on that match in a later post. For now watch the video, play the audio. You decide if that seems suspicious. FOLLOW my amazing researcher KK ⚠️As you guys know this is now day 11 of no monetization. Now more than ever we rely on the support of our community to keep the Charlie Kirk investigation alive. If you value our work and want to support us, you can click the link in the post below to donate to our fundraiser. 👇

Project Constitution

95,941 views • 26 days ago

Thank you Evans for this. I have always said this and I love that more people are seeing it as well. When Meg lied on Oprah that a senior royal has worried about what colour of skin Archie would be, I always said It was herself she was talking about. Narcissists ALWAYS accuse their victims of doing what they do themselves. They projects constantly. Every accusation is a self confession and you can clearly see Meg's desperation to be seen as a White british royal; She is desperate🔥 That is why she writes the titles everywhere even on her own clothes and front door rug🤡 She is not trying to be relatable, she treats americans like "illiterate villagers"; and she sees herself as the british royal there to teach them about life and impress her "Lofty" knowledge on "peasant americans." That is how she treated her guests who all had to sing how pretty she is and how great she is; that is how she treats Serena and all her "Friends". She is superior, they are there to do her bidding and worship her😏 Yet the general public can see what an incredibly insecure woman she is. She has done everything she could to "white pass" and erased her black carribean roots from her mother. At one point Meg even claimed yo be italian; Anything but accepting her afro carribean and american roots🤦🏽‍♀️ She only use Doria as a "black card" when she needs to attack the RF and cosplay a victim of Racism. But in real life Meghan is desperate to be seen as a white british royal. She is so desperate that she sat on Drew Barrymore show and pretended that her children, born and raise in the US; by an american mother and a black carribean grandmother "Still have british accent" STILL?!!!🤡 The boy left the UK when he was 6 months and has never been back. The daughter was born in the US and Has never been to the UK. Harry's british accent has become so washed out it is embarrassing. So what British Accent do they STILL have?!🤡 This donkey is so delusional and obsessed with Great Britian, it is embarrasing how pathologically she lies. Meghan has never taken pride in her black features: she had surgery to correct her nose and she permanently altered her curls chemically to look more White. She has one daughter and did not bother to name that daughter after her black mother or any black family member or black feminists. She picked two white british women🤡 More to the point, while living in California, she dresses or rather photoshop that girl wearing english garments with tights exactly like Princess Charlotte dressed as a little girl. But remember this is the Meghan who refused and mocked Catherine for wanting the bridesmaids to wear tights at her wedding🤡 Meg has never praised Archie's features or brown eyes, but she has been gushing about her daughter blue eyes "like Diana". She has never praised ANY feature that could be associated with the black skin🔥 But she quasi-orgasmed on Netflix about her daughter blue eyes and red hair Screaming "Blue blue blue eyes!"🤦🏽‍♀️ My goodness... how embarrasing. No Meg has never wanted to be relatable or black; she wants to feel superior and wants to be identified as a white british royal. This is why she clinge to those titles like glue. She takes zero pride in her black caribbean or american roots; None. Yes, she was the one who worried, Doria's blood would come through and show in her children🤡 She sat there days and nights worrying Archie might not be white enough to fit her ideal of the perfect little white boy...maybe blond with "blue, blue, blue eyes" looking so eerily like Diana..😏☕️ 📹Queer Lips of Truth II 🇸🇱🇬🇧
1:36

Thank you Evans for this. I have always said this and I love that more people are seeing it as well. When Meg lied on Oprah that a senior royal has worried about what colour of skin Archie would be, I always said It was herself she was talking about. Narcissists ALWAYS accuse their victims of doing what they do themselves. They projects constantly. Every accusation is a self confession and you can clearly see Meg's desperation to be seen as a White british royal; She is desperate🔥 That is why she writes the titles everywhere even on her own clothes and front door rug🤡 She is not trying to be relatable, she treats americans like "illiterate villagers"; and she sees herself as the british royal there to teach them about life and impress her "Lofty" knowledge on "peasant americans." That is how she treated her guests who all had to sing how pretty she is and how great she is; that is how she treats Serena and all her "Friends". She is superior, they are there to do her bidding and worship her😏 Yet the general public can see what an incredibly insecure woman she is. She has done everything she could to "white pass" and erased her black carribean roots from her mother. At one point Meg even claimed yo be italian; Anything but accepting her afro carribean and american roots🤦🏽‍♀️ She only use Doria as a "black card" when she needs to attack the RF and cosplay a victim of Racism. But in real life Meghan is desperate to be seen as a white british royal. She is so desperate that she sat on Drew Barrymore show and pretended that her children, born and raise in the US; by an american mother and a black carribean grandmother "Still have british accent" STILL?!!!🤡 The boy left the UK when he was 6 months and has never been back. The daughter was born in the US and Has never been to the UK. Harry's british accent has become so washed out it is embarrassing. So what British Accent do they STILL have?!🤡 This donkey is so delusional and obsessed with Great Britian, it is embarrasing how pathologically she lies. Meghan has never taken pride in her black features: she had surgery to correct her nose and she permanently altered her curls chemically to look more White. She has one daughter and did not bother to name that daughter after her black mother or any black family member or black feminists. She picked two white british women🤡 More to the point, while living in California, she dresses or rather photoshop that girl wearing english garments with tights exactly like Princess Charlotte dressed as a little girl. But remember this is the Meghan who refused and mocked Catherine for wanting the bridesmaids to wear tights at her wedding🤡 Meg has never praised Archie's features or brown eyes, but she has been gushing about her daughter blue eyes "like Diana". She has never praised ANY feature that could be associated with the black skin🔥 But she quasi-orgasmed on Netflix about her daughter blue eyes and red hair Screaming "Blue blue blue eyes!"🤦🏽‍♀️ My goodness... how embarrasing. No Meg has never wanted to be relatable or black; she wants to feel superior and wants to be identified as a white british royal. This is why she clinge to those titles like glue. She takes zero pride in her black caribbean or american roots; None. Yes, she was the one who worried, Doria's blood would come through and show in her children🤡 She sat there days and nights worrying Archie might not be white enough to fit her ideal of the perfect little white boy...maybe blond with "blue, blue, blue eyes" looking so eerily like Diana..😏☕️ 📹Queer Lips of Truth II 🇸🇱🇬🇧

Canellecitadelle

49,242 views • 1 year ago

Paul Verhoeven on whether the events that take place in "Total Recall" (1990) are real or just a dream: "It is both. To be honest, that’s what I want. I made the movie in a way that it would be true on both levels, and I spent a lot of time to get that. If you want a scientific explanation, you know, of course, in quantum mechanics there is a very interesting principle, the principle of uncertainty, Heisenberg’s principle. If you have a big object and if you try to measure the place of the object and the velocity of the object at the same time, the more precisely you measure velocity the less precise place gets. So that’s the principle. That means, of course, that there are different realities possible at the same moment. What I wanted to do in 'Total Recall' is to do a movie where both levels are true. I mean for me, of course, the film anyhow has to do with two realities, one being the reality of going as a secret agent to Mars and discovering that there is a problem, and solving the problem, which is starting the nuclear reactor and helping the guerrillas and destroying Cohaagen. The second level of the movie, of course, is that from the moment that he goes into the Rekall chair ‘til the end it’s a dream, and I tried to make that second level work throughout the whole movie. So there’s the dream level which starts when he gets into the chair and the thing is in his neck, and that would go throughout the whole movie, so in the next scene where they say, Oh, there’s a problem, there’s a big glitch here, that would be already the dream, of course. That’s where the dream starts. And the next scene where they are fighting and stuff would be part of his dream, convincing him that it is real, because there is a glitch but that would be part of the program. It would be built into the program to make him accept the fact that it’s real, but it’s a dream. If you look at the movie, if you haven’t seen it, or for the second time, you’ll see that the whole program that’s set up at the beginning when he goes to the Rekall office and he talks to this guy who sells him the program on Mars, you’ll see that he gets everything that he wants: he gets the trip to Mars, he gets the girl, the exotic girl, he ki!!s the bad guys, and he saves the entire planet. That’s what he does. And that’s basically the dream. Even halfway through the movie, you may remember, this other guy comes in, Dr. Edgemar, and tells him that he’s in a dream, that he’s still in the Rekall chair, and then Arnold says, “If I’m there, I can ki!! you.” And he puts a gun to his head and the guy says, “Sure, no problem for me, big problem for you, because you will be psychotic from now on because the walls of reality will fall apart. One moment you will be the savior of the rebel cause, the next moment you’ll be Cohaagen’s bosom buddy, but in the end—you will even have these strange fantasies about alien civilizations—but at the end you will be lobotomized.” And then if you see the movie, you realize that all these things happen. I mean he is lobotomized at the end. That’s why at the last shot, when they are so happy and kissing each other, it slowly fades to white, which for me meant, “OK, there he goes. That’s the end-that’s the dream—they lobotomized him.” And all the other things happened, he finds the alien civilization, he rescues the planet, he finds the good girl, he k!!ls the bad guys, but it’s a dream. Now, of course you can see it as a reality, too. So at the end of the movie, getting to white means either it’s a happy ending or he loses his brains . . . which is probably also a happy ending, I don’t know. That was basically what l wanted—that at the end there would be two possibilities, and they would be both true—for me they are both true—it’s not either one or the other. It’s not that either it’s a dream or it is a reality. It is a dream and it is a reality. And I think they’re both there." (Paul Verhoeven's interview with Chris Shea & Wade Jennings, 1992) P.S: On this day, 36 years ago, "Total Recall" (1990) premiered in Los Angeles, California, USA.
1:25

Paul Verhoeven on whether the events that take place in "Total Recall" (1990) are real or just a dream: "It is both. To be honest, that’s what I want. I made the movie in a way that it would be true on both levels, and I spent a lot of time to get that. If you want a scientific explanation, you know, of course, in quantum mechanics there is a very interesting principle, the principle of uncertainty, Heisenberg’s principle. If you have a big object and if you try to measure the place of the object and the velocity of the object at the same time, the more precisely you measure velocity the less precise place gets. So that’s the principle. That means, of course, that there are different realities possible at the same moment. What I wanted to do in 'Total Recall' is to do a movie where both levels are true. I mean for me, of course, the film anyhow has to do with two realities, one being the reality of going as a secret agent to Mars and discovering that there is a problem, and solving the problem, which is starting the nuclear reactor and helping the guerrillas and destroying Cohaagen. The second level of the movie, of course, is that from the moment that he goes into the Rekall chair ‘til the end it’s a dream, and I tried to make that second level work throughout the whole movie. So there’s the dream level which starts when he gets into the chair and the thing is in his neck, and that would go throughout the whole movie, so in the next scene where they say, Oh, there’s a problem, there’s a big glitch here, that would be already the dream, of course. That’s where the dream starts. And the next scene where they are fighting and stuff would be part of his dream, convincing him that it is real, because there is a glitch but that would be part of the program. It would be built into the program to make him accept the fact that it’s real, but it’s a dream. If you look at the movie, if you haven’t seen it, or for the second time, you’ll see that the whole program that’s set up at the beginning when he goes to the Rekall office and he talks to this guy who sells him the program on Mars, you’ll see that he gets everything that he wants: he gets the trip to Mars, he gets the girl, the exotic girl, he ki!!s the bad guys, and he saves the entire planet. That’s what he does. And that’s basically the dream. Even halfway through the movie, you may remember, this other guy comes in, Dr. Edgemar, and tells him that he’s in a dream, that he’s still in the Rekall chair, and then Arnold says, “If I’m there, I can ki!! you.” And he puts a gun to his head and the guy says, “Sure, no problem for me, big problem for you, because you will be psychotic from now on because the walls of reality will fall apart. One moment you will be the savior of the rebel cause, the next moment you’ll be Cohaagen’s bosom buddy, but in the end—you will even have these strange fantasies about alien civilizations—but at the end you will be lobotomized.” And then if you see the movie, you realize that all these things happen. I mean he is lobotomized at the end. That’s why at the last shot, when they are so happy and kissing each other, it slowly fades to white, which for me meant, “OK, there he goes. That’s the end-that’s the dream—they lobotomized him.” And all the other things happened, he finds the alien civilization, he rescues the planet, he finds the good girl, he k!!ls the bad guys, but it’s a dream. Now, of course you can see it as a reality, too. So at the end of the movie, getting to white means either it’s a happy ending or he loses his brains . . . which is probably also a happy ending, I don’t know. That was basically what l wanted—that at the end there would be two possibilities, and they would be both true—for me they are both true—it’s not either one or the other. It’s not that either it’s a dream or it is a reality. It is a dream and it is a reality. And I think they’re both there." (Paul Verhoeven's interview with Chris Shea & Wade Jennings, 1992) P.S: On this day, 36 years ago, "Total Recall" (1990) premiered in Los Angeles, California, USA.

DepressedBergman

66,465 views • 4 months ago

Jim Jarmusch on how he got the idea to make "Ghost Dog: The Way of the Samurai" (1999): "It really came about from wanting to work with Forest Whitaker, who I met when I was going to the Super-8 lab when I was working on 'Year of the Horse' (1997), or maybe on the video. I ran into him a couple of times and we would just start talking and he said to me the first time, "Hey, if you ever think of anything for me, let me know, I'd love to work with you." I couldn't get him out of my head, certain qualities that he has and it was more from talking to him as a person than his work. I was very, very moved by his portrayal of Charlie Parker in 'Bird' (1988). I thought it was a beautiful performance, although I'm a big be-bop fan and I did not like the movie in terms of its slant on depicting the life of Bird - how can you make a film about Bird in which Miles Davis is never even mentioned? There were a lot of things really odd to me about it. Miles' estate probably refused to let him use his name. With good reason. They usually use this very soft, gentle, poignant side of Forest and he gets cast as the loveable soft guy. And I'm really attracted to that quality, but there is a whole other side to him, just physically, his presence, there's more there than that and I wanted to get both of those things in a character. So I started thinking how can I do that? He should be a warrior and I thought he should be a hitman, that sort of cliché and then the samurai thing came to me because in eastern-culture warriors, there is a whole spiritual side to their training. If you look at the Shaolin monks in China, they're martial arts experts, but they are priests; they are enlightened religious teachers, but the physical side is also completely intertwined. So that gave me the idea to give him some depth. Then the book 'Hugga Kurai', because it's a text from the 1750s written by an old samurai as a guide to samurai life and philosophy. It contains so many things, minor, mundane details about the food you eat, or how your house is built, how often you clean your armour, to incredibly deep Zen philosophy, and it's all in this book and it jumps from one to the next. Then I just started collecting disparate ideas; I was interested in the decline of organised crime families in New York because I used to live right across from the Gambino family social club in Little Italy, and in the late 70s and early 80s when they were unravelling, and I would always see them on the street - John Gotti and Sammy 'The Bull' Gravano and Neil Belacroche and all those wise guys. So I collected some ideas about them, and the idea of pigeons came from the fact that on the roof behind me, there was an old Italian guy who had a pigeon coop for years. He died just before we started filming actually, and his birds were moved away, but I used to watch him fly his birds a lot and there was something very beautiful in that movement. Sometimes I'd just look out the window on a Saturday morning and see them moving, and the light would shift and they would go from black to white to black to white to black to white, and that was a detail. I would just collect and collect, and then I sat down and tried to weave all these disparate things into something." ("Jim Jarmusch - part three", The Guardian, 2000) P.S: On this day, 27 years ago, "Ghost Dog: The Way of the Samurai" (1999) premiered at the Cannes Film Festival, France.
2:17

Jim Jarmusch on how he got the idea to make "Ghost Dog: The Way of the Samurai" (1999): "It really came about from wanting to work with Forest Whitaker, who I met when I was going to the Super-8 lab when I was working on 'Year of the Horse' (1997), or maybe on the video. I ran into him a couple of times and we would just start talking and he said to me the first time, "Hey, if you ever think of anything for me, let me know, I'd love to work with you." I couldn't get him out of my head, certain qualities that he has and it was more from talking to him as a person than his work. I was very, very moved by his portrayal of Charlie Parker in 'Bird' (1988). I thought it was a beautiful performance, although I'm a big be-bop fan and I did not like the movie in terms of its slant on depicting the life of Bird - how can you make a film about Bird in which Miles Davis is never even mentioned? There were a lot of things really odd to me about it. Miles' estate probably refused to let him use his name. With good reason. They usually use this very soft, gentle, poignant side of Forest and he gets cast as the loveable soft guy. And I'm really attracted to that quality, but there is a whole other side to him, just physically, his presence, there's more there than that and I wanted to get both of those things in a character. So I started thinking how can I do that? He should be a warrior and I thought he should be a hitman, that sort of cliché and then the samurai thing came to me because in eastern-culture warriors, there is a whole spiritual side to their training. If you look at the Shaolin monks in China, they're martial arts experts, but they are priests; they are enlightened religious teachers, but the physical side is also completely intertwined. So that gave me the idea to give him some depth. Then the book 'Hugga Kurai', because it's a text from the 1750s written by an old samurai as a guide to samurai life and philosophy. It contains so many things, minor, mundane details about the food you eat, or how your house is built, how often you clean your armour, to incredibly deep Zen philosophy, and it's all in this book and it jumps from one to the next. Then I just started collecting disparate ideas; I was interested in the decline of organised crime families in New York because I used to live right across from the Gambino family social club in Little Italy, and in the late 70s and early 80s when they were unravelling, and I would always see them on the street - John Gotti and Sammy 'The Bull' Gravano and Neil Belacroche and all those wise guys. So I collected some ideas about them, and the idea of pigeons came from the fact that on the roof behind me, there was an old Italian guy who had a pigeon coop for years. He died just before we started filming actually, and his birds were moved away, but I used to watch him fly his birds a lot and there was something very beautiful in that movement. Sometimes I'd just look out the window on a Saturday morning and see them moving, and the light would shift and they would go from black to white to black to white to black to white, and that was a detail. I would just collect and collect, and then I sat down and tried to weave all these disparate things into something." ("Jim Jarmusch - part three", The Guardian, 2000) P.S: On this day, 27 years ago, "Ghost Dog: The Way of the Samurai" (1999) premiered at the Cannes Film Festival, France.

DepressedBergman

19,678 views • 4 months ago

🚨BREAKING: Candace Drops $10,000 CASH Bounty — Who Was BEHIND the Camera During Erika’s VIRAL Fake Cry? 👀 Candace is back and she’s exposing what she calls "Operation Erika Kirk 2.0." While the mainstream media tries to sell a "survivor story" from the White House Correspondents’ Dinner, Candace is pulling back the curtain on what really happened—and she’s putting her money where her mouth is. 💰🔥 The Breakdown: The media called it a "shooting," but reports now show it was a suspect charging a checkpoint and Secret Service firing at each other. No shots from the suspect. Yet, the media elites are acting like they survived a war zone. 🙄 Candace is questioning the "perfect timing" of the viral video showing Erika Kirk crying and saying she "just wants to go home." How did a CNN reporter capture that exact moment in a "chaotic" lockdown? 🧐 Candace is offering $10,000 CASH to anyone who has footage of the person filming Erika. She wants to see the other side of that camera. Was it organic, or was it a produced "widow-grift" moment? 🕵️‍♀️ The "Widow-Grift" Exposed: Candace isn't falling for the lecture. She’s calling out the establishment for trying to turn a socialite’s voluntary attendance at a DC gala into a reason to scold the public. No one forced her to be there. No one is responsible for her safety but her. 🛑 "We’re tired of the disingenuous games. You’re not too big to fail, and we see exactly what you’re doing." 🗣️💯 Got the footage? Send tips DM me or email projectconstitutionvideos@gmail.com or MoreTips@CandaceOwens.com and get your 10K. 💸 👇 Is this another scripted DC operation, or is Candace being too harsh? Let’s hear it in the comments. FOLLOW Candace Owens, RT and watch her FULL episode linked below.
9:27

🚨BREAKING: Candace Drops $10,000 CASH Bounty — Who Was BEHIND the Camera During Erika’s VIRAL Fake Cry? 👀 Candace is back and she’s exposing what she calls "Operation Erika Kirk 2.0." While the mainstream media tries to sell a "survivor story" from the White House Correspondents’ Dinner, Candace is pulling back the curtain on what really happened—and she’s putting her money where her mouth is. 💰🔥 The Breakdown: The media called it a "shooting," but reports now show it was a suspect charging a checkpoint and Secret Service firing at each other. No shots from the suspect. Yet, the media elites are acting like they survived a war zone. 🙄 Candace is questioning the "perfect timing" of the viral video showing Erika Kirk crying and saying she "just wants to go home." How did a CNN reporter capture that exact moment in a "chaotic" lockdown? 🧐 Candace is offering $10,000 CASH to anyone who has footage of the person filming Erika. She wants to see the other side of that camera. Was it organic, or was it a produced "widow-grift" moment? 🕵️‍♀️ The "Widow-Grift" Exposed: Candace isn't falling for the lecture. She’s calling out the establishment for trying to turn a socialite’s voluntary attendance at a DC gala into a reason to scold the public. No one forced her to be there. No one is responsible for her safety but her. 🛑 "We’re tired of the disingenuous games. You’re not too big to fail, and we see exactly what you’re doing." 🗣️💯 Got the footage? Send tips DM me or email [email protected] or [email protected] and get your 10K. 💸 👇 Is this another scripted DC operation, or is Candace being too harsh? Let’s hear it in the comments. FOLLOW Candace Owens, RT and watch her FULL episode linked below.

Project Constitution

16,098 views • 5 months ago

After the ICE shooting last week in Minnesota, Black Lives Matter MN gave a speech demanding justice and ranting about ICE. Renee Good wasn’t Black, so why is BLM giving a press conference about her? It’s because BLM was never about Black Americans; it’s about revolution. Most became familiar with BLM post-George Floyd where they were able to attach themselves to his death. But Black Lives Matter is not a black organization, it’s a communist organization using Black people’s images as cover. It was hard for people to see this in 2020 since emotions were so high and they allowed communists to speak for the life of the average Black American. They were given the microphone to portray my existence is inevitably deprived simply due to my skin color. However, I recognized early on their tactics and why they were pushing such a strong message and condemnation of America. Communists use propaganda like a weapon and they take truth to gain legitimacy so they can manipulate you into believing the lies that will come later. Good propaganda, like a good conspiracy, needs an ounce of truth to push heavy loads of exaggerations and falsehoods down the line. It’s why their talking points sometimes land with people who aren’t familiar with their tactics. Sure, you can talk about slavery, Jim Crow, or any other historical mess and you can analyze it. However, their objective isn’t to recognize our historical wrongs for a better future: It’s to use it as a reason to tear down America. There are reasons they use words like “institutional” or “systemic” because their hatred goes past an individual to the collective. They are collectivists who hold all guilty if they are tacitly part of that collective. It’s why they say you benefited from “White Supremacy” because no matter how good of a person you are, you will always be tainted with historical stains. And you don’t have to be White to be a White Supremacist because if you defend the institutions they want to dismantle, you are automatically part of that collective. Good propagandists use everything to their advantage and they know that there is a social guilt about what has been done to Black Americans. It’s a point of leverage to get normal people to concede to communistic demands. They will always use Black Communists to speak for the collective and tribal nature over time has convinced us that communistic symbolism, like the raised fist in the air, is in fact Black in nature because we saw some dudes in afros doing it on old film. They’d have you think that the Black Panthers were popular and admired by Black Americans, when they weren’t. They were fringe, radical communists who were constantly shouting for revolution. They hid behind the imagery of being some type of militant neighborhood watch but every communist’s goal is to destroy the current system to instill theirs. They don’t care that it’s a tall mountain to climb because they enjoy being martyrs for a cause. The ends always justify the means for them, so lying and misrepresenting is fine as long as it pushes us closer to revolution. They will hijack trusted institutions, like government or churches, and use this inherent trust like a skin suit tricking unsuspecting people to believe what they want you to believe. This is no different from Black Lives Matter. For most people, it’s enough to see some angry black people on stage yelling about justice to convince them that this is the demeanor or demand of the average Black American in America. Black people like me stand in the way of their cause and when we speak out against them, they’ll call me the sellout for wanting to preserve the positives of American life. We are in or around the demoralization phase of revolution. They don’t need the support of Americans to be in support of their cause or to do anything to overtly support them. They just need enough people to sit on their hands while targeting institutions of power to either destroy from the outside or infiltrate to dismantle from within. Renee Good is their martyr, just as George Floyd was in 2020. You don’t have to knowingly sacrifice yourself or even be a communist to be a martyr for them; hijacking identities, especially dead ones, are perfect for manipulating the public. They will instigate events, cause chaos and when something goes awry, they’ll use it against us. This is exactly what’s happening in Minnesota with ICE. ICE could operate under normal conditions like it does everywhere else but they’ve turned non-newsworthy apprehensions into a spectacle so that it taints their image so they can force incidents exactly like Renee Good’s death. Now, when there are riots, it’s ICE’s fault and not the heavily funded leftist organizations who financially exist because of adversarial foreign nations who can’t wait till the United States is demoted from its power position. They are agitators at their core, they will use all goodwill to their advantage and strangle us with our own niceness. They will poke and prod our society, forcing you to question everything you held as sacred so they can replace it with something that suits them. Communist agitators are dying for Black Americans to be convinced that this somehow is negatively impacting us and they will propel any black face to make this happen. God help us if a black communist gets killed while provoking a response from ICE. Black Lives Matter Global and Minnesota doesn’t give a damn about Black people it can’t use to further a revolution. They’re not a Black advocacy group; they’re a communist outfit that gallivants in blackface.
0:45

After the ICE shooting last week in Minnesota, Black Lives Matter MN gave a speech demanding justice and ranting about ICE. Renee Good wasn’t Black, so why is BLM giving a press conference about her? It’s because BLM was never about Black Americans; it’s about revolution. Most became familiar with BLM post-George Floyd where they were able to attach themselves to his death. But Black Lives Matter is not a black organization, it’s a communist organization using Black people’s images as cover. It was hard for people to see this in 2020 since emotions were so high and they allowed communists to speak for the life of the average Black American. They were given the microphone to portray my existence is inevitably deprived simply due to my skin color. However, I recognized early on their tactics and why they were pushing such a strong message and condemnation of America. Communists use propaganda like a weapon and they take truth to gain legitimacy so they can manipulate you into believing the lies that will come later. Good propaganda, like a good conspiracy, needs an ounce of truth to push heavy loads of exaggerations and falsehoods down the line. It’s why their talking points sometimes land with people who aren’t familiar with their tactics. Sure, you can talk about slavery, Jim Crow, or any other historical mess and you can analyze it. However, their objective isn’t to recognize our historical wrongs for a better future: It’s to use it as a reason to tear down America. There are reasons they use words like “institutional” or “systemic” because their hatred goes past an individual to the collective. They are collectivists who hold all guilty if they are tacitly part of that collective. It’s why they say you benefited from “White Supremacy” because no matter how good of a person you are, you will always be tainted with historical stains. And you don’t have to be White to be a White Supremacist because if you defend the institutions they want to dismantle, you are automatically part of that collective. Good propagandists use everything to their advantage and they know that there is a social guilt about what has been done to Black Americans. It’s a point of leverage to get normal people to concede to communistic demands. They will always use Black Communists to speak for the collective and tribal nature over time has convinced us that communistic symbolism, like the raised fist in the air, is in fact Black in nature because we saw some dudes in afros doing it on old film. They’d have you think that the Black Panthers were popular and admired by Black Americans, when they weren’t. They were fringe, radical communists who were constantly shouting for revolution. They hid behind the imagery of being some type of militant neighborhood watch but every communist’s goal is to destroy the current system to instill theirs. They don’t care that it’s a tall mountain to climb because they enjoy being martyrs for a cause. The ends always justify the means for them, so lying and misrepresenting is fine as long as it pushes us closer to revolution. They will hijack trusted institutions, like government or churches, and use this inherent trust like a skin suit tricking unsuspecting people to believe what they want you to believe. This is no different from Black Lives Matter. For most people, it’s enough to see some angry black people on stage yelling about justice to convince them that this is the demeanor or demand of the average Black American in America. Black people like me stand in the way of their cause and when we speak out against them, they’ll call me the sellout for wanting to preserve the positives of American life. We are in or around the demoralization phase of revolution. They don’t need the support of Americans to be in support of their cause or to do anything to overtly support them. They just need enough people to sit on their hands while targeting institutions of power to either destroy from the outside or infiltrate to dismantle from within. Renee Good is their martyr, just as George Floyd was in 2020. You don’t have to knowingly sacrifice yourself or even be a communist to be a martyr for them; hijacking identities, especially dead ones, are perfect for manipulating the public. They will instigate events, cause chaos and when something goes awry, they’ll use it against us. This is exactly what’s happening in Minnesota with ICE. ICE could operate under normal conditions like it does everywhere else but they’ve turned non-newsworthy apprehensions into a spectacle so that it taints their image so they can force incidents exactly like Renee Good’s death. Now, when there are riots, it’s ICE’s fault and not the heavily funded leftist organizations who financially exist because of adversarial foreign nations who can’t wait till the United States is demoted from its power position. They are agitators at their core, they will use all goodwill to their advantage and strangle us with our own niceness. They will poke and prod our society, forcing you to question everything you held as sacred so they can replace it with something that suits them. Communist agitators are dying for Black Americans to be convinced that this somehow is negatively impacting us and they will propel any black face to make this happen. God help us if a black communist gets killed while provoking a response from ICE. Black Lives Matter Global and Minnesota doesn’t give a damn about Black people it can’t use to further a revolution. They’re not a Black advocacy group; they’re a communist outfit that gallivants in blackface.

Adam B. Coleman, Proud Father & Imperfect Man

83,962 views • 9 months ago

🚨EXCLUSIVE: Video Showing "BEHIND THE HEAD" View Of Charlie Kirk At The EXACT Moment Of His Assassination- The Same Video TPUSA Has Been HIDING For Months😱 Candace Owens just released the video TPUSA has hidden from the public for 8 months. This is the behind-the-head view of Charlie Kirk the moment he was taken out at UVU. She says it's her duty as a citizen journalist to release it in the interest of transparency. Let's break down what she reveals. First, the lie from TPUSA staff. Owens explains she reached out to Terrell Farnsworth, the AV guy who took down the cameras, expecting a reasonable explanation. Instead, she got "excuse after excuse" and a bizarre claim that he "didn't know how to send a file"—despite running an AV company. The stonewalling started immediately. Now, the video itself. Owens confirms there is NO GORE. She points out that Charlie's perfectly white t-shirt remained white until he hit the ground. She says, "The bullet didn't go through... and didn't even cause any sort of a mess." More importantly, you can see ZERO blood heading backward. All the blood came from a forward-facing arterial spray. This directly contradicts the official narrative. Owens states, "Never buy the narrative that a .30-06 is what took out Charlie Kirk. I'm just not accepting that narrative whatsoever." So what does she think happened? Her theory is backed by what you see in the video and the SUV crime scene photos. She points to the powerful magnetic clasp on Charlie's necklace, which is still on him. Her theory, which she says is "well-adopted," is that a wireless microphone pack—the device behind the magnet—was what was shattered. This explains the black shards in the SUV and the lack of a traditional bullet wound. But the strangest part? The necklace. Owens notes that everyone—Erika Kirk, Brian Harpole—had a "personal story about Charlie's necklace." Even more chilling: Erica claims the Feds were at the hospital searching the car and specifically said, "We were looking for that necklace." Why were federal agents looking for his necklace? How did they know about it? This isn't just a video; it's a key piece of evidence that dismantles the official story and points to a targeted device, not a random act of violence. TPUSA hid it. The Feds were looking for parts of it. And now, the public can finally see the truth. FOLLOW Candace Owens, RT Everywhere and watch her FULL episode below. What do you see? Drop your analysis in the comments.⬇️
7:22

🚨EXCLUSIVE: Video Showing "BEHIND THE HEAD" View Of Charlie Kirk At The EXACT Moment Of His Assassination- The Same Video TPUSA Has Been HIDING For Months😱 Candace Owens just released the video TPUSA has hidden from the public for 8 months. This is the behind-the-head view of Charlie Kirk the moment he was taken out at UVU. She says it's her duty as a citizen journalist to release it in the interest of transparency. Let's break down what she reveals. First, the lie from TPUSA staff. Owens explains she reached out to Terrell Farnsworth, the AV guy who took down the cameras, expecting a reasonable explanation. Instead, she got "excuse after excuse" and a bizarre claim that he "didn't know how to send a file"—despite running an AV company. The stonewalling started immediately. Now, the video itself. Owens confirms there is NO GORE. She points out that Charlie's perfectly white t-shirt remained white until he hit the ground. She says, "The bullet didn't go through... and didn't even cause any sort of a mess." More importantly, you can see ZERO blood heading backward. All the blood came from a forward-facing arterial spray. This directly contradicts the official narrative. Owens states, "Never buy the narrative that a .30-06 is what took out Charlie Kirk. I'm just not accepting that narrative whatsoever." So what does she think happened? Her theory is backed by what you see in the video and the SUV crime scene photos. She points to the powerful magnetic clasp on Charlie's necklace, which is still on him. Her theory, which she says is "well-adopted," is that a wireless microphone pack—the device behind the magnet—was what was shattered. This explains the black shards in the SUV and the lack of a traditional bullet wound. But the strangest part? The necklace. Owens notes that everyone—Erika Kirk, Brian Harpole—had a "personal story about Charlie's necklace." Even more chilling: Erica claims the Feds were at the hospital searching the car and specifically said, "We were looking for that necklace." Why were federal agents looking for his necklace? How did they know about it? This isn't just a video; it's a key piece of evidence that dismantles the official story and points to a targeted device, not a random act of violence. TPUSA hid it. The Feds were looking for parts of it. And now, the public can finally see the truth. FOLLOW Candace Owens, RT Everywhere and watch her FULL episode below. What do you see? Drop your analysis in the comments.⬇️

Project Constitution

33,508 views • 7 months ago

At the edge of Scotland, there is a pub you cannot drive to. No road takes you there. To reach The Old Forge in Inverie, you either cross Loch Nevis by ferry from Mallaig or walk roughly 16 miles across the Knoydart Peninsula. That is part of what makes it different. Most travel now is built around ease. Direct flights or fast transfers. Perfect itineraries. Places that ask almost nothing from you before they give you the view, the meal, the photo, or the story. Knoydart does not work that way. You have to check the weather and you have to watch the ferry schedule. You have to understand that the landscape does not care about your plans. And if you walk in, the trail makes you earn every mile. Wet ground. Cold wind. Peat bog and silence. Mountains in every direction. The type of place where your phone becomes less useful and your attention starts working again. Then, eventually, you see Inverie. A small village by the water. A white pub near the shoreline. The warm room you crave after the cold. That's the Old Forge. It's known as one of Britain’s most remote pubs, but that is not the whole story. Knoydart has a hard history, shaped by isolation, the Highland Clearances, and a community that eventually fought to take ownership of the land around them. When The Old Forge was later put up for sale, residents and supporters stepped in again. They raised the money, brought it into community ownership, and kept the village gathering place in local hands. That is what makes it worth writing about. Not just the pint at the end of the journey, but the walk, the ferry, the weather, the history, and the people who decided this place was still worth protecting. I wrote about the long road to The Old Forge and why some places mean more because they refuse to be convenient. Check out the full newsletter:
1:04

At the edge of Scotland, there is a pub you cannot drive to. No road takes you there. To reach The Old Forge in Inverie, you either cross Loch Nevis by ferry from Mallaig or walk roughly 16 miles across the Knoydart Peninsula. That is part of what makes it different. Most travel now is built around ease. Direct flights or fast transfers. Perfect itineraries. Places that ask almost nothing from you before they give you the view, the meal, the photo, or the story. Knoydart does not work that way. You have to check the weather and you have to watch the ferry schedule. You have to understand that the landscape does not care about your plans. And if you walk in, the trail makes you earn every mile. Wet ground. Cold wind. Peat bog and silence. Mountains in every direction. The type of place where your phone becomes less useful and your attention starts working again. Then, eventually, you see Inverie. A small village by the water. A white pub near the shoreline. The warm room you crave after the cold. That's the Old Forge. It's known as one of Britain’s most remote pubs, but that is not the whole story. Knoydart has a hard history, shaped by isolation, the Highland Clearances, and a community that eventually fought to take ownership of the land around them. When The Old Forge was later put up for sale, residents and supporters stepped in again. They raised the money, brought it into community ownership, and kept the village gathering place in local hands. That is what makes it worth writing about. Not just the pint at the end of the journey, but the walk, the ferry, the weather, the history, and the people who decided this place was still worth protecting. I wrote about the long road to The Old Forge and why some places mean more because they refuse to be convenient. Check out the full newsletter:

The Timeless Traveler 🇺🇸

1,634,381 views • 3 months ago

This is the REAL STORY of how COVID started in the U.S.—Don't let Deep State shills like Kash Patel gaslight you (1/17 - supporting evidence in thread) "[COVID wasn't] a pandemic. It [was] a military attack. It [was] a deployment of chemical [and] maybe radiological weapons." Retired pharma R&D executive Sasha Latypova (sashalatypova.substack.com "Due Diligence and Art") describes for Mic Meow (@MicMeowed) how the COVID "pandemic" was actually pulled off in the U.S., highlighting the U.S. military's involvement in the release of a biological (and potentially radiological) weapon, the lack of evidence supporting the existence of a patient zero in the U.S. (or even China), and the rollout of "hospital murder protocols," which were used to generate the deaths needed to make it look like there was a "pandemic" occurring. "The Department of Defense quickly took over the response to the supposed public health event [i.e., the COVID-19 'pandemic']," Latypova notes at the beginning of the clip, before delving into the timeline of events—which is strongly supported by the available evidence. "The [supposed SARS-CoV-2 'virus'] sequence was posted into GenBank on January 9th, 2020, ostensibly from a Chinese patient[, for whom there is no evidence supporting their existence]." (See tweet 5/17 for supporting evidence of Latypova's claim here.) "The [supposed SARS-CoV-2 'virus'] sequence was posted into GenBank on January 9th [2020]. On January 30th [2020], the CDC claimed that we have a first person in the United States, in Washington State, who was, again, infected with this virus. Again, [there was no] evidence of this person ever existing." (See tweet 4/17 for supporting evidence of this claim.) (For reference, GenBank is a comprehensive public database that contains annotated collections of all publicly available nucleotide and DNA sequences.) "On February 4th, there's a phone call—and this is...leaked audio from AstraZeneca executives. There was a phone call placed from the Department of Defense. I believe the person making the phone call was Colonel Matt Hepburn from DARPA," Latypova says. "And he called the consortium of pharmaceutical companies telling them to switch from previously funded pan-influenza ['vaccine'] models to COVID ['vaccine'] models because, and I'm quoting him, 'COVID was declared a national security threat.'" (See tweet 16/17 for supporting evidence.) "So my question is," Latypova says, "[from] January 30th [2020] to February 4th [2020], we only have one ostensible patient having COVID. [But it's not] clear. Are they ill? Did they die? What happened?" Latypova goes on to ask rhetorically: "We have maybe 11 cases—PCR cases—of COVID in the United States [but] somehow, Colonel Matt Hepburn decides to...to say to the entire pharmaceutical consortium, which is over 300 companies, to start working on COVID products because it's a national security threat. Based on what? That's my question: How do you know that?" Latypova goes on to note: "What's more interesting...we have a whole series—hours—of Department of Defense press conferences at the Pentagon with media, over the 2020/2021 timeframe, when they were working on Operation Warp Speed. And so they would do these periodic press updates, and they're hilarious and very interesting....I don't recall the date exactly right now, but it was somewhere [in] February, early March, there [was] a press event where, there's Colonel Wendy Sammons-Jackson and a few others. So there's General [Michael J.] Talley, who leads the presentation from the DOD, and there are two or three [other] participants from Fort Detrick, the biolab and, the US Army infectious disease research. And they're all discussing this stuff. And so she [Sammons-Jackson] says specifically, 'Oh, we've received...the pathogen, meaning the COVID virus... and we [meaning the DOD] are growing the stocks of it." (See tweet 2/17 for supporting evidence.) "At that time...I remind you," Latypova adds, "we only had maybe one case; maybe 10 cases or 20 [PCR] cases of this, meaning there was no COVID virus in the US. Yet Colonel Wendy Sammons-Jackson is growing stocks of it. And guess what happens after she's growing stocks of it? We have an explosion of cases and illness in the United States. So how is this a pandemic when nothing happens before they announce it, after they announce it, and tell you we're growing stocks of it, we have a pandemic?" Latypova concludes: "So it's [COVID] not a pandemic. It's a military attack. It's a deployment of chemical, maybe radiological weapons. I don't know what they deployed, but they deployed something. There was some weird illness that was going around. [But] it's a deployment. And a majority of the deaths...were caused by, we know, hospital murder protocols—killing people in the hospitals with the protocol that I can walk you through because they tried it on my on my mother-in-law, unsuccessfully. We rescued her." (See tweets 9/17 and 10/17 for supporting evidence of the "hospital murder protocols.") "And, so I can walk you through that protocol....[I've been] with people testifying [as to] how their loved ones were killed in the exact same manner...[with] remdesivir and with ventilators and, dehydration, starvation, cruelty...Isolation...So those are the deaths. That's how they caused the deaths. They simulated illness with something [else]—some chemical weapon or something. And, the main point of this was to deploy these biological weapons, which are the shots [the COVID injections]."
6:07

This is the REAL STORY of how COVID started in the U.S.—Don't let Deep State shills like Kash Patel gaslight you (1/17 - supporting evidence in thread) "[COVID wasn't] a pandemic. It [was] a military attack. It [was] a deployment of chemical [and] maybe radiological weapons." Retired pharma R&D executive Sasha Latypova (sashalatypova.substack.com "Due Diligence and Art") describes for Mic Meow (@MicMeowed) how the COVID "pandemic" was actually pulled off in the U.S., highlighting the U.S. military's involvement in the release of a biological (and potentially radiological) weapon, the lack of evidence supporting the existence of a patient zero in the U.S. (or even China), and the rollout of "hospital murder protocols," which were used to generate the deaths needed to make it look like there was a "pandemic" occurring. "The Department of Defense quickly took over the response to the supposed public health event [i.e., the COVID-19 'pandemic']," Latypova notes at the beginning of the clip, before delving into the timeline of events—which is strongly supported by the available evidence. "The [supposed SARS-CoV-2 'virus'] sequence was posted into GenBank on January 9th, 2020, ostensibly from a Chinese patient[, for whom there is no evidence supporting their existence]." (See tweet 5/17 for supporting evidence of Latypova's claim here.) "The [supposed SARS-CoV-2 'virus'] sequence was posted into GenBank on January 9th [2020]. On January 30th [2020], the CDC claimed that we have a first person in the United States, in Washington State, who was, again, infected with this virus. Again, [there was no] evidence of this person ever existing." (See tweet 4/17 for supporting evidence of this claim.) (For reference, GenBank is a comprehensive public database that contains annotated collections of all publicly available nucleotide and DNA sequences.) "On February 4th, there's a phone call—and this is...leaked audio from AstraZeneca executives. There was a phone call placed from the Department of Defense. I believe the person making the phone call was Colonel Matt Hepburn from DARPA," Latypova says. "And he called the consortium of pharmaceutical companies telling them to switch from previously funded pan-influenza ['vaccine'] models to COVID ['vaccine'] models because, and I'm quoting him, 'COVID was declared a national security threat.'" (See tweet 16/17 for supporting evidence.) "So my question is," Latypova says, "[from] January 30th [2020] to February 4th [2020], we only have one ostensible patient having COVID. [But it's not] clear. Are they ill? Did they die? What happened?" Latypova goes on to ask rhetorically: "We have maybe 11 cases—PCR cases—of COVID in the United States [but] somehow, Colonel Matt Hepburn decides to...to say to the entire pharmaceutical consortium, which is over 300 companies, to start working on COVID products because it's a national security threat. Based on what? That's my question: How do you know that?" Latypova goes on to note: "What's more interesting...we have a whole series—hours—of Department of Defense press conferences at the Pentagon with media, over the 2020/2021 timeframe, when they were working on Operation Warp Speed. And so they would do these periodic press updates, and they're hilarious and very interesting....I don't recall the date exactly right now, but it was somewhere [in] February, early March, there [was] a press event where, there's Colonel Wendy Sammons-Jackson and a few others. So there's General [Michael J.] Talley, who leads the presentation from the DOD, and there are two or three [other] participants from Fort Detrick, the biolab and, the US Army infectious disease research. And they're all discussing this stuff. And so she [Sammons-Jackson] says specifically, 'Oh, we've received...the pathogen, meaning the COVID virus... and we [meaning the DOD] are growing the stocks of it." (See tweet 2/17 for supporting evidence.) "At that time...I remind you," Latypova adds, "we only had maybe one case; maybe 10 cases or 20 [PCR] cases of this, meaning there was no COVID virus in the US. Yet Colonel Wendy Sammons-Jackson is growing stocks of it. And guess what happens after she's growing stocks of it? We have an explosion of cases and illness in the United States. So how is this a pandemic when nothing happens before they announce it, after they announce it, and tell you we're growing stocks of it, we have a pandemic?" Latypova concludes: "So it's [COVID] not a pandemic. It's a military attack. It's a deployment of chemical, maybe radiological weapons. I don't know what they deployed, but they deployed something. There was some weird illness that was going around. [But] it's a deployment. And a majority of the deaths...were caused by, we know, hospital murder protocols—killing people in the hospitals with the protocol that I can walk you through because they tried it on my on my mother-in-law, unsuccessfully. We rescued her." (See tweets 9/17 and 10/17 for supporting evidence of the "hospital murder protocols.") "And, so I can walk you through that protocol....[I've been] with people testifying [as to] how their loved ones were killed in the exact same manner...[with] remdesivir and with ventilators and, dehydration, starvation, cruelty...Isolation...So those are the deaths. That's how they caused the deaths. They simulated illness with something [else]—some chemical weapon or something. And, the main point of this was to deploy these biological weapons, which are the shots [the COVID injections]."

Sense Receptor

52,103 views • 1 year ago

Laura Kuenssberg, "Keir Starmer said you were high on drugs and soft on Putin" Zack Polanksi, "That was beneath the audience of the Prime Minister" "There are thousands of unnecessary deaths from drug harms and dangerous drugs, what we need is a public health approach. That's not just me saying that, that's experts" "So when we talk about legalising drugs, the key bit is about legalising and regulating" "If someone has a problematic relationship with drugs, surely they should be seen by a medical health professional to help them" "For Keir Starmer to make cheap jokes at PMQs is pretty disgraceful" "On Putin, this this the Prime Minister who is subservient to Donald Trump. A man who says he admires Putin while shaming Zelenskyy" "Defence is a really serious issue, and to make jokes about Putin and Russia is vile" Laura Kuenssberg, "Are you sending a message to young people that if you legalise all drugs its ok to use drugs?" Zack Polanksi, "Well Keir Starmer made a joke about taking drugs at university" "What we see is that this is very racialised" "Very often it is young black people stopped and searched on the street, 8x more than their white peers" "The danger is happening now where we're pushing it into street corners" Laura Kuenssberg, "You say Keir Starmer joked about using drugs at university" Zack Polanski, "I've never taken drugs in my life, or even drunk alcohol, but I don't sit here as the fun police. People should do what they want to do, it just wasn't for me" "But this is about a system change, against a hypocritical approach" "We've had Labour and Conservative MPs say on. the record they've taken drugs, but they're both putting in prison people who have taken drugs, and again, it is disproportionately young black people" Laura Kuenssberg, "Why haven't you had a drink?" Zack Polanski, "I just grew up in a school where a lot of my friends were drinking and taking drugs" "I've always liked dancing and do it without drinking or drugs"
3:55

Laura Kuenssberg, "Keir Starmer said you were high on drugs and soft on Putin" Zack Polanksi, "That was beneath the audience of the Prime Minister" "There are thousands of unnecessary deaths from drug harms and dangerous drugs, what we need is a public health approach. That's not just me saying that, that's experts" "So when we talk about legalising drugs, the key bit is about legalising and regulating" "If someone has a problematic relationship with drugs, surely they should be seen by a medical health professional to help them" "For Keir Starmer to make cheap jokes at PMQs is pretty disgraceful" "On Putin, this this the Prime Minister who is subservient to Donald Trump. A man who says he admires Putin while shaming Zelenskyy" "Defence is a really serious issue, and to make jokes about Putin and Russia is vile" Laura Kuenssberg, "Are you sending a message to young people that if you legalise all drugs its ok to use drugs?" Zack Polanksi, "Well Keir Starmer made a joke about taking drugs at university" "What we see is that this is very racialised" "Very often it is young black people stopped and searched on the street, 8x more than their white peers" "The danger is happening now where we're pushing it into street corners" Laura Kuenssberg, "You say Keir Starmer joked about using drugs at university" Zack Polanski, "I've never taken drugs in my life, or even drunk alcohol, but I don't sit here as the fun police. People should do what they want to do, it just wasn't for me" "But this is about a system change, against a hypocritical approach" "We've had Labour and Conservative MPs say on. the record they've taken drugs, but they're both putting in prison people who have taken drugs, and again, it is disproportionately young black people" Laura Kuenssberg, "Why haven't you had a drink?" Zack Polanski, "I just grew up in a school where a lot of my friends were drinking and taking drugs" "I've always liked dancing and do it without drinking or drugs"

Farrukh

35,013 views • 8 months ago

Admin post: The big, tough looking guy with the shaved head that had dogs in bite sports and upper level obedience once referred to me as the "Badass woman in the wheelchair with the Rottweilers" and told me I was probably the toughest person he knew. Most people see disability as weak. They have no idea the resiliency we develop to keep moving forward despite all the barriers, the biggest one being attitude. Even getting up, going to the bathroom, and getting dressed is hard work. There's always pain. Pretty much every single thing I do is significantly harder than when I could walk. It's isolating, but often it's too exhausting to notice. People see this middle aged woman with no legs in a power wheelchair walk her well mannered dog and think it's sweet. I'm constantly asked who trains my dogs because most people are quick to make assumptions that I can't. Where other people can simply say they're capable of doing something, I have to prove it to be believed. The past 2 years I've packed and loaded the van, driven myself and 2 powerful dogs hundreds of kilometers, lugged our stuff into hotels where I usually have to move furniture to get a plug in by the bed for my wheelchair charger. I've exercised and pottied dogs in hotel parking lots in wind, rain, and snow. I've done the same early mornings and long days as everyone else there. Sometimes we do ok. Sometimes we do brilliantly. Just because I don't have legs doesn't mean I can't go out there and kick ass. Despite being 2025, there's still a ton of barriers in the world and planning and decisions are typically made by able-bodied who often can't envision the impact they have on others. Being disabled comes with significant extra financial burden, and often policies are put in place that just make it more difficult. Very few days go by where I don't have to advocate for myself and others or fight for what should be a right. It can get extremely disheartening, and sometimes I want to just give up fighting and say they win. I don't. I don't call myself handicapped. I use the term disabled. The term handicapped is used in horse racing. The horse that has proven itself to be superior is required to carry extra weight to make it "fair" for others. The attitudes towards disabilities, the barriers that exist in the built environment, and many of the policies in government are what handicap us. They place the additional challenge on us that often prevent us from succeeding. They often prevent us from even participating. The big guy with the shaved head was right. I'm very tough. I have to be tougher than everyone else just to get to be there. When you see someone with a disability and judge them as weak, ask yourself just how well you'd do in their situation, facing the barriers they face. There's a good chance they're every bit as tough as you. Video description for inclusivity: clips of a woman in a power wheelchair and a large rottweiler competing in performance events at dog shows
0:29

Admin post: The big, tough looking guy with the shaved head that had dogs in bite sports and upper level obedience once referred to me as the "Badass woman in the wheelchair with the Rottweilers" and told me I was probably the toughest person he knew. Most people see disability as weak. They have no idea the resiliency we develop to keep moving forward despite all the barriers, the biggest one being attitude. Even getting up, going to the bathroom, and getting dressed is hard work. There's always pain. Pretty much every single thing I do is significantly harder than when I could walk. It's isolating, but often it's too exhausting to notice. People see this middle aged woman with no legs in a power wheelchair walk her well mannered dog and think it's sweet. I'm constantly asked who trains my dogs because most people are quick to make assumptions that I can't. Where other people can simply say they're capable of doing something, I have to prove it to be believed. The past 2 years I've packed and loaded the van, driven myself and 2 powerful dogs hundreds of kilometers, lugged our stuff into hotels where I usually have to move furniture to get a plug in by the bed for my wheelchair charger. I've exercised and pottied dogs in hotel parking lots in wind, rain, and snow. I've done the same early mornings and long days as everyone else there. Sometimes we do ok. Sometimes we do brilliantly. Just because I don't have legs doesn't mean I can't go out there and kick ass. Despite being 2025, there's still a ton of barriers in the world and planning and decisions are typically made by able-bodied who often can't envision the impact they have on others. Being disabled comes with significant extra financial burden, and often policies are put in place that just make it more difficult. Very few days go by where I don't have to advocate for myself and others or fight for what should be a right. It can get extremely disheartening, and sometimes I want to just give up fighting and say they win. I don't. I don't call myself handicapped. I use the term disabled. The term handicapped is used in horse racing. The horse that has proven itself to be superior is required to carry extra weight to make it "fair" for others. The attitudes towards disabilities, the barriers that exist in the built environment, and many of the policies in government are what handicap us. They place the additional challenge on us that often prevent us from succeeding. They often prevent us from even participating. The big guy with the shaved head was right. I'm very tough. I have to be tougher than everyone else just to get to be there. When you see someone with a disability and judge them as weak, ask yourself just how well you'd do in their situation, facing the barriers they face. There's a good chance they're every bit as tough as you. Video description for inclusivity: clips of a woman in a power wheelchair and a large rottweiler competing in performance events at dog shows

Team Servicerottie🇨🇦🐕‍🦺🦽

30,591 views • 1 year ago

Abdul El-Sayed Is a Paper Doctor With an Empty Résumé The people's champ has never treated a patient, and the little work he has done hasn't improved health in Detroit By Charlie LeDuff Charlie LeDuff A cop told me recently that he got a call from a rich white man complaining about a suspicious black man roaming his neighborhood. Cops hate those kinds of calls. It puts them in a bad spot. But cops have to respond to calls. So he did. Turned out, the black man was an Amazon driver. And naturally, the white man had a sign in his yard that read “Black Lives Matter.” Now, there’s a new sign on the white man’s lawn: “Abdul for U.S. Senate.” Dr. Abdul El-Sayed is running on a platform of good union jobs, money out of politics, and Medicare for All. I don’t understand the attraction. It’s doubtful the rich white man ever worked in a factory or has to worry about medical bills. Let’s call it virtue signaling for virtue’s sake. It takes the sting out of white privilege. For you workday humps who’d like to know something about the candidate beyond slick 30-second commercials, it’s worth noting that El-Sayed never worked in a factory, and aside from some part-time gigs at various colleges, his resume is thin. Very thin. The first thing you need to know is that El-Sayed is a paper doctor. He’s never treated a patient, is not licensed in Michigan, and never passed the board examinations. He can’t so much as dispense aspirin from an ambulance. The second thing you need to know is that El-Sayed, 41, has worked just two real jobs in his adult life, totaling less than four years, according to his resume. This from a guy who wants to be senator for life. What’s troubling is where he worked and what he actually accomplished: He was appointed as the top public health official in Detroit and then Wayne County. Both departments are an historical quagmire of corruption and incompetence. Believe me, I know, I helped put one director behind bars for, among other things, embezzling public health dollars to pay for hair plugs. For his part, El-Sayed was appointed as Detroit’s health director in 2015 by then-Mayor Mike Duggan. At that time, as the city was emerging from its historic bankruptcy, El-Sayed’s health department was funneling hundreds of thousands of dollars into a pet program run by Duggan’s mistress. The program was supposed to lower infant mortality rates in the city. After just 17 months on the job, El-Sayed resigned to run for governor. Then Mistress-gate scandal exploded and infant mortality skyrocketed. Nothing changed. To El-Sayed’s credit, before resigning as health director, he commissioned a report that showed Duggan’s demolition blitz was poisoning the city’s children. That program is now the subject of a sprawling FBI investigation. However, El-Sayed the candidate has said little about it. A couple years and cups of coffee later, El-Sayed was appointed in 2023 as the medical chief of Wayne County. According to his own campaign commercial, El-Sayed’s biggest accomplishment was a partnership with a nonprofit that supplied 16,000 eye glasses to needy children. What the commercial does not tell you is that the nonprofit existed for a decade beforehand and the county’s portion was funded primarily by Biden’s Covid bucks. One-time inflationary federal dollars is no solution to a health crisis. All the while, life expectancy in Detroit continues to crater from pre-pandemic levels, hovering around 70 years old. That’s hardly an effective record. There are also serious questions about El-Sayed’s campaigns finance problems, including indications of straw donors, actual contributors blowing past legal limits, and a Super PAC committed to spending millions of dollars on his behalf. Then there are the disturbing questions regarding the mental fitness of those he surrounds himself with, including a former staffer charged with terrorism, a current staffer who says all white women are racist (ironically, that staffer herself is a white woman), and a prominent podcaster who once said America deserved 9/11. And can we get a timeline of when he actually lived in Michigan? But those are stories for another day. Go ahead and plant your yard signs rich white guy. That's your right. Just remember, you reap what you sow.
1:50

Abdul El-Sayed Is a Paper Doctor With an Empty Résumé The people's champ has never treated a patient, and the little work he has done hasn't improved health in Detroit By Charlie LeDuff Charlie LeDuff A cop told me recently that he got a call from a rich white man complaining about a suspicious black man roaming his neighborhood. Cops hate those kinds of calls. It puts them in a bad spot. But cops have to respond to calls. So he did. Turned out, the black man was an Amazon driver. And naturally, the white man had a sign in his yard that read “Black Lives Matter.” Now, there’s a new sign on the white man’s lawn: “Abdul for U.S. Senate.” Dr. Abdul El-Sayed is running on a platform of good union jobs, money out of politics, and Medicare for All. I don’t understand the attraction. It’s doubtful the rich white man ever worked in a factory or has to worry about medical bills. Let’s call it virtue signaling for virtue’s sake. It takes the sting out of white privilege. For you workday humps who’d like to know something about the candidate beyond slick 30-second commercials, it’s worth noting that El-Sayed never worked in a factory, and aside from some part-time gigs at various colleges, his resume is thin. Very thin. The first thing you need to know is that El-Sayed is a paper doctor. He’s never treated a patient, is not licensed in Michigan, and never passed the board examinations. He can’t so much as dispense aspirin from an ambulance. The second thing you need to know is that El-Sayed, 41, has worked just two real jobs in his adult life, totaling less than four years, according to his resume. This from a guy who wants to be senator for life. What’s troubling is where he worked and what he actually accomplished: He was appointed as the top public health official in Detroit and then Wayne County. Both departments are an historical quagmire of corruption and incompetence. Believe me, I know, I helped put one director behind bars for, among other things, embezzling public health dollars to pay for hair plugs. For his part, El-Sayed was appointed as Detroit’s health director in 2015 by then-Mayor Mike Duggan. At that time, as the city was emerging from its historic bankruptcy, El-Sayed’s health department was funneling hundreds of thousands of dollars into a pet program run by Duggan’s mistress. The program was supposed to lower infant mortality rates in the city. After just 17 months on the job, El-Sayed resigned to run for governor. Then Mistress-gate scandal exploded and infant mortality skyrocketed. Nothing changed. To El-Sayed’s credit, before resigning as health director, he commissioned a report that showed Duggan’s demolition blitz was poisoning the city’s children. That program is now the subject of a sprawling FBI investigation. However, El-Sayed the candidate has said little about it. A couple years and cups of coffee later, El-Sayed was appointed in 2023 as the medical chief of Wayne County. According to his own campaign commercial, El-Sayed’s biggest accomplishment was a partnership with a nonprofit that supplied 16,000 eye glasses to needy children. What the commercial does not tell you is that the nonprofit existed for a decade beforehand and the county’s portion was funded primarily by Biden’s Covid bucks. One-time inflationary federal dollars is no solution to a health crisis. All the while, life expectancy in Detroit continues to crater from pre-pandemic levels, hovering around 70 years old. That’s hardly an effective record. There are also serious questions about El-Sayed’s campaigns finance problems, including indications of straw donors, actual contributors blowing past legal limits, and a Super PAC committed to spending millions of dollars on his behalf. Then there are the disturbing questions regarding the mental fitness of those he surrounds himself with, including a former staffer charged with terrorism, a current staffer who says all white women are racist (ironically, that staffer herself is a white woman), and a prominent podcaster who once said America deserved 9/11. And can we get a timeline of when he actually lived in Michigan? But those are stories for another day. Go ahead and plant your yard signs rich white guy. That's your right. Just remember, you reap what you sow.

Michigan Enjoyer

50,202 views • 3 months ago

There’s Something About Watching Someone Who Really Knows How to Dance The first thing I noticed was how little he seemed to care about the camera. He was dressed in a black suit and a fedora, dancing in front of some old-looking buildings, and at first I thought I would watch for a few seconds and move on. But then one step caught my attention. He slid into the beat, stopped almost exactly where the music seemed to ask him to, and moved on without making the transition look difficult. What I liked most was that you could actually see the dancing. His feet were doing the work. His shoulders moved with the music, his weight shifted from one side to the other, and every turn seemed to have a reason for being there. Nothing felt thrown in just to make the routine look complicated. I ended up watching the clip a few times, and that was when I realized what I found so satisfying about it. The movements were precise, but they didn’t look stiff. He had obviously spent a lot of time learning how to control his body, yet none of that effort was visible anymore. He looked relaxed. That kind of ease is difficult to fake. It also made me think about how differently we usually watch dance online. So many videos are built around quick cuts and short bursts of movement. You see a few seconds, get the most exciting part, and then the video moves on to something else. This one gives the dancing room to breathe. You can follow an entire sequence instead of trying to piece it together from edits. Maybe that is why the old-fashioned details work so well here. The suit and fedora, the architecture behind him, and the rhythm of the music all give the performance a particular character. But I don't think I enjoyed it simply because it reminded me of another era. The interesting thing is that the movement itself doesn't feel dated. A good dancer still looks like a good dancer. What surprised me most, though, was how much enjoyment seemed to be in it. He wasn’t dancing as if he were trying to prove something. There was a lightness to the performance, almost as if he knew the rhythm well enough that he could stop thinking about the steps and simply enjoy them. That is probably what kept me there. We spend so much time online watching people trying to catch our attention that it can be refreshing to watch someone who has already earned it without asking for it. No dramatic setup. No complicated explanation. Just music, movement, and someone who clearly knows what he is doing. And maybe that is why I watched it more than once. Not because it was spectacular. Because it was satisfying to watch someone be genuinely good at something. Have you ever stopped scrolling because a person was simply so good at what they were doing that you wanted to watch the whole thing?
0:59

There’s Something About Watching Someone Who Really Knows How to Dance The first thing I noticed was how little he seemed to care about the camera. He was dressed in a black suit and a fedora, dancing in front of some old-looking buildings, and at first I thought I would watch for a few seconds and move on. But then one step caught my attention. He slid into the beat, stopped almost exactly where the music seemed to ask him to, and moved on without making the transition look difficult. What I liked most was that you could actually see the dancing. His feet were doing the work. His shoulders moved with the music, his weight shifted from one side to the other, and every turn seemed to have a reason for being there. Nothing felt thrown in just to make the routine look complicated. I ended up watching the clip a few times, and that was when I realized what I found so satisfying about it. The movements were precise, but they didn’t look stiff. He had obviously spent a lot of time learning how to control his body, yet none of that effort was visible anymore. He looked relaxed. That kind of ease is difficult to fake. It also made me think about how differently we usually watch dance online. So many videos are built around quick cuts and short bursts of movement. You see a few seconds, get the most exciting part, and then the video moves on to something else. This one gives the dancing room to breathe. You can follow an entire sequence instead of trying to piece it together from edits. Maybe that is why the old-fashioned details work so well here. The suit and fedora, the architecture behind him, and the rhythm of the music all give the performance a particular character. But I don't think I enjoyed it simply because it reminded me of another era. The interesting thing is that the movement itself doesn't feel dated. A good dancer still looks like a good dancer. What surprised me most, though, was how much enjoyment seemed to be in it. He wasn’t dancing as if he were trying to prove something. There was a lightness to the performance, almost as if he knew the rhythm well enough that he could stop thinking about the steps and simply enjoy them. That is probably what kept me there. We spend so much time online watching people trying to catch our attention that it can be refreshing to watch someone who has already earned it without asking for it. No dramatic setup. No complicated explanation. Just music, movement, and someone who clearly knows what he is doing. And maybe that is why I watched it more than once. Not because it was spectacular. Because it was satisfying to watch someone be genuinely good at something. Have you ever stopped scrolling because a person was simply so good at what they were doing that you wanted to watch the whole thing?

Music over time🎻

50,709 views • 1 month ago

⃤ Video of a Black Triangle - What's the Frequency, Gerry? ⃤ "A very clear visual representation of what was on the radar. It resembled a very black, triangular or delta shape to it" "It was always slightly out of focus for some reason." "Garry Nolan told us to watch for the cloud formations." (If you scroll down to the bottom, I'll tell you the exact time stamps for each the UAP videos that were shown.) "We believe [it's NHI]. Either that or some very sophisticated technology that maybe we're reverse engineering." "There was a specific electronic signature (frequency) emanating from them when they were going into or coming out of the water, so they were easy to track." ~Bob Fish ~ Gerry Tedesco: August 29th, "we were in the RV, running tests on our equipment because we was planning on going out that weekend." John Tedesco: "And we noticed that we had a signature (on their spectrum analyzer) there that was well presented, very unusual for the area. And we kind of collaborated that with some radar data. Radar seemed to align with what we had on the spectrum analyzer. The object, we believe, was over the water at that point, simply because of the distance that we were able to capture it on the radar. It presented in a cloud layer, exited a cloud layer, produced a signature." Gerry; "This was a single thunderstorm cloud in the sky and the weather was great. We had cumulous clouds out there, mostly clear. And this was a dark, cumulonimbus cloud. It was a very dark thunderstorm cloud, and it looked out a place. " Ross Coulthart: "Do you think that that cloud might have been a fake cloud?" Donna Lee Nardo: "So Garry P. Nolan, he came out with us for our field study one night. He told us, Watch for the cloud formations.' And John, Gerry, and I saw one really nasty-looking...it looked like 10 motherships situated...oriented north to south, one night when we were doing the field study. And I believe this was early on in 2022. And it also was a clear night, but it just looked out of place. It was dark, yet there were lighted portions. But it was just so humongous. And we always remember that Garry had said, look at the cloud formations." Gerry: "Yeah, we definitely had some oddities out there." Coulthart: "I've had people, multiple people have sent me imagery. There's quite famous ones on YouTube where you see what looks like a cloud, and it's shaped just ever so slightly like a disc or a craft. And it's got the fluffy edges of a cloud, and then it suddenly maneuvers and just moves away. And I sometimes wonder whether something or someone is using clouds as a form of stealth or signature management." Gerry: "That's a possibility. We look at that, we look to see if it is a cloud. We use shortwave infrared, which does pick up moisture. And it'll actually differentiate the precipitation in a cloud, or moisture in a cloud, so we know it is a real cloud." Coulhart: "Did you do that with this cloud that night?" John: "Exactly, exactly. And this is something that we could determine that there wasn't moisture content." Coulthart: "So you were able to show it wasn't a classic cumulonimbus cloud, even though it looked like one." John: "No, no. Yeah, and the object was well hidden for a short period of time. Actually, relatively long period of time before it emerged from the cloud body." Coulthart: "So Donna is probably right: This is probably some kind of intelligent stealth management by something." Gerry: "It's a possibility." Donna: "Possibly." John: "It could very well be." (I like how all three will only go as far as, Possible and Could be.) Coulthart: "This is where it gets really interesting. Talk me through what happens next. " Gerry: "Okay, so we watched an object emerge from the cloud on radar. John and I quickly went to get our binoculars, we have what's called Vortex binoculars. These are high-end binoculars, great optical glass. John had began looking at the cloud with those, and he told me, we both went outside. I was trying to find one of the other cameras, scrambling, trying to get one of the other cameras going. "And John said, 'There's a black object moving between the cloud.' And then it was emerging from the cloud. So I grabbed my cell phone and videotaped it. While John was looking at them, we switched. And what we saw was something...originally it resembled a very black, triangular or delta shape to it, or bell shape to it. It had that Delta shape, or triangular shape." Coulthart: "And was this showing up on radar at this stage, that delta shape?" Gerry: "Yes." John: "Yes." Coulthart: "Wow!" John: "Yes, we did have a radar target." Gerry: "We tracked it on radar. On radar, it appears to separate into two more objects, which is quite interesting." Coulthart: "You found something interesting in the frequency, and you can't talk about it, can you? Has the FBI asked you, not to talk about it?" Gerry: "Yes, that's the sensitive part. There was quite a bit of interesting signals, but that goes into signals intelligence, which we can't talk about." Coulthart: "Just let me guess. 1.6 by any chance?" (They all laugh) Donna: "You've been talking to people." Gerry: "No comment." Coulthart: "No, it just fascinates me. Is it 1.6 gigahertz, or megahertz? I'm trying to remember." John: "It's gigahertz. Yeah, I know with Skinwalker Ranch, I know the one, 1.6 seems to come up quite a bit. There's also a three-gigahertz signal, supposedly." Gerry: "There's a few others, too. We'll leave it at that." Coulthart: "No, but it's interesting. It's such a consistent thing, and I'm really interested because all around the world, people are contacting me, talking about 1.6, in particular, but also about three gigahertz. And nobody's explaining it. But often it's an indicator." ~~~From My Bob Fish Blog~~~ Bob Fish: "In that same TS/SCI building cafeteria in El Segundo, I had lunch with a senior USAF NCO who had worked for Project Blue Book in the 1970s (after it had been 'officially disbanded'). He was an ELINT technician (electronic intelligence) who flew in RC-135s from MacDill AFB in Florida. The 'normal' target was Cuba where they did lots of snooping and sometimes challenging the Cubans to turn on radar and other systems. "He said there were times when they were diverted from these missions to track UFOs off the east coast of Florida. His claim was that UFOs had a landing and takeoff spot in the ocean east of Miami, north of Bermuda. He also claimed there was a specific electronic signature (frequency) emanating from them when they were going into or coming out of the water, so they were easy to track. On several occasions they filmed the UFO as it transitioned from water to air or vice versa. High quality film of UFOs is 'out there' somewhere!" (What was the signature? 1.6 gigahertz? 3.0?) ~~~End Bob Fish Excerpt~~~ Coulthart: "And as you say - without giving away the frequency that you detected - you detected a frequency anomaly on your spectrum analyzer. You saw it there. Then you got it on your radar. And then when you visually observed it with the binoculars, the vortex binoculars, you then corroborated that object on the radar as well. So you've got four separate data points to corroborate something anomalous." John: "And a very, very clear visual representation of what was on the radar. The interesting thing I will say that we had observed flights of commercial aircraft at the same time through these lenses, these very clear lenses that we use. The commercial aircraft was extremely detailed, in focus. You can even make out the writing on the on the aircraft. The object itself? No." Gerry: "It was always slightly out of focus for some reason." John: "It was poorly presented." Coulthart: "And you gents would understand, and I'm sure Donna as well, that the Alcubierre-drive principles. That, essentially, if something is coming, if it's warping space time, there's allegedly some kind of plasma or some kind of distortion field around the object. Do you think that might explain what you were seeing? Gerry: That's a possibility." John: "That's a very strong possibility." Gerry: "It's something we're looking into. There was also, there was a shimmer around it. Definitely a possibility of some kind of field effect around it." ~~~ Time Stamps Extremely bright, luminous sphere over the ocean. Not visible to the naked eye. - 13:33 The Black Triangle - 33:31 Orb-Like Object Over Land in Farmingville, N.Y. (Where my sister lives) ~ 58:18 Similar to what @MeaganOurada saw - 1:14:05
8:29

⃤ Video of a Black Triangle - What's the Frequency, Gerry? ⃤ "A very clear visual representation of what was on the radar. It resembled a very black, triangular or delta shape to it" "It was always slightly out of focus for some reason." "Garry Nolan told us to watch for the cloud formations." (If you scroll down to the bottom, I'll tell you the exact time stamps for each the UAP videos that were shown.) "We believe [it's NHI]. Either that or some very sophisticated technology that maybe we're reverse engineering." "There was a specific electronic signature (frequency) emanating from them when they were going into or coming out of the water, so they were easy to track." ~Bob Fish ~ Gerry Tedesco: August 29th, "we were in the RV, running tests on our equipment because we was planning on going out that weekend." John Tedesco: "And we noticed that we had a signature (on their spectrum analyzer) there that was well presented, very unusual for the area. And we kind of collaborated that with some radar data. Radar seemed to align with what we had on the spectrum analyzer. The object, we believe, was over the water at that point, simply because of the distance that we were able to capture it on the radar. It presented in a cloud layer, exited a cloud layer, produced a signature." Gerry; "This was a single thunderstorm cloud in the sky and the weather was great. We had cumulous clouds out there, mostly clear. And this was a dark, cumulonimbus cloud. It was a very dark thunderstorm cloud, and it looked out a place. " Ross Coulthart: "Do you think that that cloud might have been a fake cloud?" Donna Lee Nardo: "So Garry P. Nolan, he came out with us for our field study one night. He told us, Watch for the cloud formations.' And John, Gerry, and I saw one really nasty-looking...it looked like 10 motherships situated...oriented north to south, one night when we were doing the field study. And I believe this was early on in 2022. And it also was a clear night, but it just looked out of place. It was dark, yet there were lighted portions. But it was just so humongous. And we always remember that Garry had said, look at the cloud formations." Gerry: "Yeah, we definitely had some oddities out there." Coulthart: "I've had people, multiple people have sent me imagery. There's quite famous ones on YouTube where you see what looks like a cloud, and it's shaped just ever so slightly like a disc or a craft. And it's got the fluffy edges of a cloud, and then it suddenly maneuvers and just moves away. And I sometimes wonder whether something or someone is using clouds as a form of stealth or signature management." Gerry: "That's a possibility. We look at that, we look to see if it is a cloud. We use shortwave infrared, which does pick up moisture. And it'll actually differentiate the precipitation in a cloud, or moisture in a cloud, so we know it is a real cloud." Coulhart: "Did you do that with this cloud that night?" John: "Exactly, exactly. And this is something that we could determine that there wasn't moisture content." Coulthart: "So you were able to show it wasn't a classic cumulonimbus cloud, even though it looked like one." John: "No, no. Yeah, and the object was well hidden for a short period of time. Actually, relatively long period of time before it emerged from the cloud body." Coulthart: "So Donna is probably right: This is probably some kind of intelligent stealth management by something." Gerry: "It's a possibility." Donna: "Possibly." John: "It could very well be." (I like how all three will only go as far as, Possible and Could be.) Coulthart: "This is where it gets really interesting. Talk me through what happens next. " Gerry: "Okay, so we watched an object emerge from the cloud on radar. John and I quickly went to get our binoculars, we have what's called Vortex binoculars. These are high-end binoculars, great optical glass. John had began looking at the cloud with those, and he told me, we both went outside. I was trying to find one of the other cameras, scrambling, trying to get one of the other cameras going. "And John said, 'There's a black object moving between the cloud.' And then it was emerging from the cloud. So I grabbed my cell phone and videotaped it. While John was looking at them, we switched. And what we saw was something...originally it resembled a very black, triangular or delta shape to it, or bell shape to it. It had that Delta shape, or triangular shape." Coulthart: "And was this showing up on radar at this stage, that delta shape?" Gerry: "Yes." John: "Yes." Coulthart: "Wow!" John: "Yes, we did have a radar target." Gerry: "We tracked it on radar. On radar, it appears to separate into two more objects, which is quite interesting." Coulthart: "You found something interesting in the frequency, and you can't talk about it, can you? Has the FBI asked you, not to talk about it?" Gerry: "Yes, that's the sensitive part. There was quite a bit of interesting signals, but that goes into signals intelligence, which we can't talk about." Coulthart: "Just let me guess. 1.6 by any chance?" (They all laugh) Donna: "You've been talking to people." Gerry: "No comment." Coulthart: "No, it just fascinates me. Is it 1.6 gigahertz, or megahertz? I'm trying to remember." John: "It's gigahertz. Yeah, I know with Skinwalker Ranch, I know the one, 1.6 seems to come up quite a bit. There's also a three-gigahertz signal, supposedly." Gerry: "There's a few others, too. We'll leave it at that." Coulthart: "No, but it's interesting. It's such a consistent thing, and I'm really interested because all around the world, people are contacting me, talking about 1.6, in particular, but also about three gigahertz. And nobody's explaining it. But often it's an indicator." ~~~From My Bob Fish Blog~~~ Bob Fish: "In that same TS/SCI building cafeteria in El Segundo, I had lunch with a senior USAF NCO who had worked for Project Blue Book in the 1970s (after it had been 'officially disbanded'). He was an ELINT technician (electronic intelligence) who flew in RC-135s from MacDill AFB in Florida. The 'normal' target was Cuba where they did lots of snooping and sometimes challenging the Cubans to turn on radar and other systems. "He said there were times when they were diverted from these missions to track UFOs off the east coast of Florida. His claim was that UFOs had a landing and takeoff spot in the ocean east of Miami, north of Bermuda. He also claimed there was a specific electronic signature (frequency) emanating from them when they were going into or coming out of the water, so they were easy to track. On several occasions they filmed the UFO as it transitioned from water to air or vice versa. High quality film of UFOs is 'out there' somewhere!" (What was the signature? 1.6 gigahertz? 3.0?) ~~~End Bob Fish Excerpt~~~ Coulthart: "And as you say - without giving away the frequency that you detected - you detected a frequency anomaly on your spectrum analyzer. You saw it there. Then you got it on your radar. And then when you visually observed it with the binoculars, the vortex binoculars, you then corroborated that object on the radar as well. So you've got four separate data points to corroborate something anomalous." John: "And a very, very clear visual representation of what was on the radar. The interesting thing I will say that we had observed flights of commercial aircraft at the same time through these lenses, these very clear lenses that we use. The commercial aircraft was extremely detailed, in focus. You can even make out the writing on the on the aircraft. The object itself? No." Gerry: "It was always slightly out of focus for some reason." John: "It was poorly presented." Coulthart: "And you gents would understand, and I'm sure Donna as well, that the Alcubierre-drive principles. That, essentially, if something is coming, if it's warping space time, there's allegedly some kind of plasma or some kind of distortion field around the object. Do you think that might explain what you were seeing? Gerry: That's a possibility." John: "That's a very strong possibility." Gerry: "It's something we're looking into. There was also, there was a shimmer around it. Definitely a possibility of some kind of field effect around it." ~~~ Time Stamps Extremely bright, luminous sphere over the ocean. Not visible to the naked eye. - 13:33 The Black Triangle - 33:31 Orb-Like Object Over Land in Farmingville, N.Y. (Where my sister lives) ~ 58:18 Similar to what @MeaganOurada saw - 1:14:05

Joe Murgia

14,232 views • 11 months ago

Ok, I think we need to shift the conversation around why we join policing back to exactly that, the why? 😌 I wanted to join from a very young age.🧍‍♂️ I had an early learning centre police officer outfit that I wore till it faded and used to make my dad walk up and down my road with me writing down number plates in my first ‘note book’. 😂 I learnt the phonetic alphabet at about six or seven and then when I was little older, got addicted to ‘The Bill’. 🚔 I think that must be where I wanted to join response. 🚨 Response is the absolute definition of policing to me. 💯 The emergencies come in and we race out to help and when we get there, no matter what it is 99.9% we’re first on scene. 🤷🏼‍♂️ I know we’re burdened with roles that aren’t ours, we all agree on that, but the core role of ‘blue lighting’ to say a burglary in progress, is truly the essence of why most people join policing. ✅ But that’s not for everyone and maybe we need to embrace that in a different way. 🤔 I think we should all join as constables and complete our training period of two years and then progress into different roles like we used to. I have met countless direct entry Detectives who moved over to response because it’s not what they thought it would be. 😟 Why? 👀 The skills learnt in those two years are invaluable and also ground you in the whole organisation. 👏 I think too we need to return to a focus of scenario based training and move away from a bizarre belief that academia solves policing’s problems. 😏 Scenarios have two distinct benefits: 1) They test you in situations you’ve never been in before and give you an insight into your instincts in those challenging moments. ⚠️ 2) They give the trainer the same insight from a different perspective into your ability to deal with them and your strengths and weaknesses.❗️ They also have a bit of a hidden third benefit. I loved the scenarios I was given during training, it was finally when I knew ‘my why’ was right. I wanted to step in, in moments when most won’t, most are scared or most simply don’t want the bother of tackling a difficult situation. 😅 My favourite incidents at work are major, critical or public order based. They require a helicopter view, calm, control and critical thinking. As a Sergeant they’re what I thrive on. 🔥 New Zealand Police seem to agree with this style of learning and testing and have heavily invested in a state of the art scenario orientated training area, a power move in my opinion. 🇳🇿👏 I’d like to see Hendon or an equivalent morning back to that. ✅ Sure Hydra has its benefits, but proper scenarios like there used to be are invaluable. 🤷🏼‍♂️ But, this all requires investment. 😏 We shall see. 👀 #ThinBlueLine 🚨
0:36

Ok, I think we need to shift the conversation around why we join policing back to exactly that, the why? 😌 I wanted to join from a very young age.🧍‍♂️ I had an early learning centre police officer outfit that I wore till it faded and used to make my dad walk up and down my road with me writing down number plates in my first ‘note book’. 😂 I learnt the phonetic alphabet at about six or seven and then when I was little older, got addicted to ‘The Bill’. 🚔 I think that must be where I wanted to join response. 🚨 Response is the absolute definition of policing to me. 💯 The emergencies come in and we race out to help and when we get there, no matter what it is 99.9% we’re first on scene. 🤷🏼‍♂️ I know we’re burdened with roles that aren’t ours, we all agree on that, but the core role of ‘blue lighting’ to say a burglary in progress, is truly the essence of why most people join policing. ✅ But that’s not for everyone and maybe we need to embrace that in a different way. 🤔 I think we should all join as constables and complete our training period of two years and then progress into different roles like we used to. I have met countless direct entry Detectives who moved over to response because it’s not what they thought it would be. 😟 Why? 👀 The skills learnt in those two years are invaluable and also ground you in the whole organisation. 👏 I think too we need to return to a focus of scenario based training and move away from a bizarre belief that academia solves policing’s problems. 😏 Scenarios have two distinct benefits: 1) They test you in situations you’ve never been in before and give you an insight into your instincts in those challenging moments. ⚠️ 2) They give the trainer the same insight from a different perspective into your ability to deal with them and your strengths and weaknesses.❗️ They also have a bit of a hidden third benefit. I loved the scenarios I was given during training, it was finally when I knew ‘my why’ was right. I wanted to step in, in moments when most won’t, most are scared or most simply don’t want the bother of tackling a difficult situation. 😅 My favourite incidents at work are major, critical or public order based. They require a helicopter view, calm, control and critical thinking. As a Sergeant they’re what I thrive on. 🔥 New Zealand Police seem to agree with this style of learning and testing and have heavily invested in a state of the art scenario orientated training area, a power move in my opinion. 🇳🇿👏 I’d like to see Hendon or an equivalent morning back to that. ✅ Sure Hydra has its benefits, but proper scenarios like there used to be are invaluable. 🤷🏼‍♂️ But, this all requires investment. 😏 We shall see. 👀 #ThinBlueLine 🚨

Brick Cop©️

25,016 views • 2 years ago