Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

There was a problem loading this video. This could be due to a temporary network issue or the video might be unavailable.

Brett Meiselas: Erika Kirk was extremely gracious in her speech. I really, deeply feel for her. I cannot imagine the strength it takes to get up on that stage in front of so many people just days after your husband was shot in such an atrocious manner, killed in... cold blood. I cannot imagine having the strength to deliver the speech she gave. But to see the way political actors hijacked this event for their own ends—it goes to what I said earlier: they never waste a tragedy. They always try to exploit it. You had people who were upset, grieving, mourning someone they cared about. And instead of consoling them, instead of uniting the country—this could have been a moment to bring out the best in everyone, to say, we are all Americans—they used it to inflame tensions, stoke more hatred, and even stoke violence. That is completely disgraceful. That, to me, is the most dangerous aspect of Donald Trump as a so-called leader: he cannot lead in moments of crisis. When crisis strikes, he inevitably makes it far, far worse.show more

MeidasTouch

1,331,406 subscribers

113,722 views • 10 months ago •via X (Twitter)

Health & Wellness News & Politics

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

I listened to Erika Kirk’s full speech at the memorial, and I want to share a few thoughts that came to me while live streaming the event. This is not political. First, I should say that I grew up as a Muslim in a Muslim country. I don’t know enough about Christianity to say if what I witnessed is rooted in faith or culture. But what struck me most was how, even though death is heavy and this was by nature a sad occasion, the entire event carried a celebratory spirit that honored life. That contrast hit me deeply. In Islam, even though we believe that good people go to heaven, the relationship with God is taught through fear. Funerals are overwhelmingly sad, often filled with warnings of the terrifying first night in the grave. Growing up hearing that, and then witnessing people celebrate life, speak of God’s love, and remember someone through the impact he had on others; it felt so refreshing, so positive. Second, I was profoundly moved by Erika Kirk’s words. I cannot fathom the strength it takes to stand and deliver such a meaningful speech after losing the love of your life. But even more than that, the grace it takes to forgive the very person who destroyed your world. I cannot imagine myself standing on a stage, sending love to those who cheered your husband’s murder, or inviting others to spread God’s love in response because, as she said, “we do not respond to hate with hate.” That is powerful beyond words. Again, I am ignorant when it comes to Christianity, but if this is what it truly embodies, then I am envious of those who get to experience that feeling.

I listened to Erika Kirk’s full speech at the memorial, and I want to share a few thoughts that came to me while live streaming the event. This is not political. First, I should say that I grew up as a Muslim in a Muslim country. I don’t know enough about Christianity to say if what I witnessed is rooted in faith or culture. But what struck me most was how, even though death is heavy and this was by nature a sad occasion, the entire event carried a celebratory spirit that honored life. That contrast hit me deeply. In Islam, even though we believe that good people go to heaven, the relationship with God is taught through fear. Funerals are overwhelmingly sad, often filled with warnings of the terrifying first night in the grave. Growing up hearing that, and then witnessing people celebrate life, speak of God’s love, and remember someone through the impact he had on others; it felt so refreshing, so positive. Second, I was profoundly moved by Erika Kirk’s words. I cannot fathom the strength it takes to stand and deliver such a meaningful speech after losing the love of your life. But even more than that, the grace it takes to forgive the very person who destroyed your world. I cannot imagine myself standing on a stage, sending love to those who cheered your husband’s murder, or inviting others to spread God’s love in response because, as she said, “we do not respond to hate with hate.” That is powerful beyond words. Again, I am ignorant when it comes to Christianity, but if this is what it truly embodies, then I am envious of those who get to experience that feeling.

Sana Ebrahimi Ledene

5,251,661 views • 10 months ago

Pep Guardiola on watching Arsenal’s style: “Yeah [I like watching Arsenal]…” Reporter: “What is it you like about them because they get a lot of criticism for their style?” Guardiola: “Yeah, people are so demanding. So demanding for the media, for the supporters, for everyone. I enjoy watching it. I learn a lot, many, many, many things. And the people, what they want, the people they want is win. “We fight in an aspect that is really, really, really important that we cannot fight against. It's 22 years without winning the Premier League. So with that aspect, we cannot fight. So they have something that makes it unique. “I know that I knew that feeling when we arrived here and for a long time we didn't win the Premier League, or a long time not because with Manuel and Mancini they did it, but for our era I would say one at a time, but in the first I know how you feel it, and that is something that we cannot play against, so that's why we had to focus on the way we had to play.”

Pep Guardiola on watching Arsenal’s style: “Yeah [I like watching Arsenal]…” Reporter: “What is it you like about them because they get a lot of criticism for their style?” Guardiola: “Yeah, people are so demanding. So demanding for the media, for the supporters, for everyone. I enjoy watching it. I learn a lot, many, many, many things. And the people, what they want, the people they want is win. “We fight in an aspect that is really, really, really important that we cannot fight against. It's 22 years without winning the Premier League. So with that aspect, we cannot fight. So they have something that makes it unique. “I know that I knew that feeling when we arrived here and for a long time we didn't win the Premier League, or a long time not because with Manuel and Mancini they did it, but for our era I would say one at a time, but in the first I know how you feel it, and that is something that we cannot play against, so that's why we had to focus on the way we had to play.”

Connor Humm

241,805 views • 4 months ago

⚡️ “Most people in Europe cannot understand why Russia is so scary to them that, in order to confront it, they need to tighten their belts and forget about their own interests. But the ruling elites continue to whip up hysteria; they claim that a war with Russia is almost on the threshold, repeating this nonsense, this mantra, time after time. I am telling you honestly, I sometimes look at what they are saying and think they cannot believe what they are saying. I mean, they cannot believe their own statements that Russia is going to attack NATO. But they convince their own population of it. So what kind of people are they? They are either very incompetent if they do believe this nonsense, or just dishonest because they themselves do not believe in it, but convince their own folk of it. I would just like to say: calm down, sleep well, and take care of your own problems. Look at what is happening on the streets of European cities, what is happening to the economy, industry, European culture and identity, with huge debts and a growing crisis in social and security systems, out-of-control migration, and the growth of violence” - President Putin.

⚡️ “Most people in Europe cannot understand why Russia is so scary to them that, in order to confront it, they need to tighten their belts and forget about their own interests. But the ruling elites continue to whip up hysteria; they claim that a war with Russia is almost on the threshold, repeating this nonsense, this mantra, time after time. I am telling you honestly, I sometimes look at what they are saying and think they cannot believe what they are saying. I mean, they cannot believe their own statements that Russia is going to attack NATO. But they convince their own population of it. So what kind of people are they? They are either very incompetent if they do believe this nonsense, or just dishonest because they themselves do not believe in it, but convince their own folk of it. I would just like to say: calm down, sleep well, and take care of your own problems. Look at what is happening on the streets of European cities, what is happening to the economy, industry, European culture and identity, with huge debts and a growing crisis in social and security systems, out-of-control migration, and the growth of violence” - President Putin.

🇷🇺Russia is not Enemy

100,667 views • 10 months ago

"When we were living as refugees, we went to many places telling the international community that Rwanda was our home and that we wanted to return. Some people would come and raise the matter with the government that was in power here. The response they received was that Rwanda was too small and that there was no place for us to go. Imagine being told there is no place for you in the very country you came from. You cannot tell someone to remain where they are, to spend their entire life as a refugee, and for their children to grow up as refugees as well. I used to tell people, even at the beginning of our liberation struggle, that whatever treatment we received in the countries where we lived, they were not the people I had a grievance against. After all, it was my own country that had denied me the right to return because it claimed there was no room for me. The people I had a grievance against were those who had the responsibility to guarantee my rights in my own country, but instead denied them. Those were the people we had to confront. And that is exactly what happened." President Kagame | Indangamirwa 16th Cohort #MeetThePresident

"When we were living as refugees, we went to many places telling the international community that Rwanda was our home and that we wanted to return. Some people would come and raise the matter with the government that was in power here. The response they received was that Rwanda was too small and that there was no place for us to go. Imagine being told there is no place for you in the very country you came from. You cannot tell someone to remain where they are, to spend their entire life as a refugee, and for their children to grow up as refugees as well. I used to tell people, even at the beginning of our liberation struggle, that whatever treatment we received in the countries where we lived, they were not the people I had a grievance against. After all, it was my own country that had denied me the right to return because it claimed there was no room for me. The people I had a grievance against were those who had the responsibility to guarantee my rights in my own country, but instead denied them. Those were the people we had to confront. And that is exactly what happened." President Kagame | Indangamirwa 16th Cohort #MeetThePresident

Presidency | Rwanda

214,275 views • 18 days ago

Baier: I just got off the phone with the president…. I asked, “what you are saying is you know there is somebody on the ground in Iran that is going to rise up?” He said, “yeah, I feel there is. I feel that and some of them are no longer with us to be honest because it was 49 leaders that were taken out. That was going to take four weeks we thought to get rid of the Iranian leadership and it is always, you know, if they hide, it is a lot longer than four weeks. They would have been hiding. We were shocked when we heard what was going on. We knew exactly what was happening… they are talking about using people now that nobody ever heard of—even they don't know. They are using people, studying people to be the leader that even they don't know who they are. Can you believe that?” I said it's a tough succession plan in Iran. He said, “49 leaders is deep. It's very deep. When they met, they met for breakfast. They assumed it was good for a lot of reasons. Number one they didn't think we knew. You never attack in the morning having to do with wind and sun and a lot of things. It was amazing that we knew everything we knew.”

Baier: I just got off the phone with the president…. I asked, “what you are saying is you know there is somebody on the ground in Iran that is going to rise up?” He said, “yeah, I feel there is. I feel that and some of them are no longer with us to be honest because it was 49 leaders that were taken out. That was going to take four weeks we thought to get rid of the Iranian leadership and it is always, you know, if they hide, it is a lot longer than four weeks. They would have been hiding. We were shocked when we heard what was going on. We knew exactly what was happening… they are talking about using people now that nobody ever heard of—even they don't know. They are using people, studying people to be the leader that even they don't know who they are. Can you believe that?” I said it's a tough succession plan in Iran. He said, “49 leaders is deep. It's very deep. When they met, they met for breakfast. They assumed it was good for a lot of reasons. Number one they didn't think we knew. You never attack in the morning having to do with wind and sun and a lot of things. It was amazing that we knew everything we knew.”

Acyn

1,065,464 views • 5 months ago

This family booked a child’s birthday party at this water park for 200 people. Then they advertised it on social media and was selling tickets to their event at this park. The park caught wind of what they were doing and cancelled their event due to over 500 people showing up for an event booked only for 250 people. Was this fair or was it another motive involved? I can’t blame them especially if they aren’t equipped to handle that many people. In college we used to always go to this bar after class late at night around 10pm. That night a friend’s band was supposed to be playing there and we helped sell tickets for the event. There ended up being a misunderstanding, the bar said there was a max occupancy of 200 people, so the band assumed they could have sold 200 tickets. We sold all of the tickets, when we got there over 40 people were already there as part of the normal crowd. So it all 200 people show up that bought tickets there would be an issue as it would exceed occupancy. The bar owner was getting antsy because he didn’t want any issues if he exceeded occupancy and was in the verge of canceling the show. The band and the owner engaged in a heated argument and the band said the way he said it, he was implying it could be 200 people and that he should only have let people in that had tickets considering it was an event. The owner argued back saying and he quoted himself that the max occupancy was 200 and that he never gave the band a number for how many tickets that could have been sold. I think they could have both handled the details much better and they were both in the wrong. The show ended up getting canceled because of how many people was continuing to show up due to his cheap drink specials he always has that night.

This family booked a child’s birthday party at this water park for 200 people. Then they advertised it on social media and was selling tickets to their event at this park. The park caught wind of what they were doing and cancelled their event due to over 500 people showing up for an event booked only for 250 people. Was this fair or was it another motive involved? I can’t blame them especially if they aren’t equipped to handle that many people. In college we used to always go to this bar after class late at night around 10pm. That night a friend’s band was supposed to be playing there and we helped sell tickets for the event. There ended up being a misunderstanding, the bar said there was a max occupancy of 200 people, so the band assumed they could have sold 200 tickets. We sold all of the tickets, when we got there over 40 people were already there as part of the normal crowd. So it all 200 people show up that bought tickets there would be an issue as it would exceed occupancy. The bar owner was getting antsy because he didn’t want any issues if he exceeded occupancy and was in the verge of canceling the show. The band and the owner engaged in a heated argument and the band said the way he said it, he was implying it could be 200 people and that he should only have let people in that had tickets considering it was an event. The owner argued back saying and he quoted himself that the max occupancy was 200 and that he never gave the band a number for how many tickets that could have been sold. I think they could have both handled the details much better and they were both in the wrong. The show ended up getting canceled because of how many people was continuing to show up due to his cheap drink specials he always has that night.

SonnyBoy🇺🇸

1,480,878 views • 17 days ago

This is important. Someone in the crowd confessed to the shooting immediately after it happened, despite not having a weapon? Why? Does this mean they were a decoy, and this was a joint operation? They have now apprehended multiple people, yet the shooter is still at large. An eyewitness claims that the shot was fired immediately after someone asked Charlie Kirk about trans violence and that he believes there were several people in on it. Did they wait for this specific question? The FBI and Kash Patel need to get to the bottom of this horrific crime as soon as possible. They cannot be allowed to get away with this.

This is important. Someone in the crowd confessed to the shooting immediately after it happened, despite not having a weapon? Why? Does this mean they were a decoy, and this was a joint operation? They have now apprehended multiple people, yet the shooter is still at large. An eyewitness claims that the shot was fired immediately after someone asked Charlie Kirk about trans violence and that he believes there were several people in on it. Did they wait for this specific question? The FBI and Kash Patel need to get to the bottom of this horrific crime as soon as possible. They cannot be allowed to get away with this.

Green Lives Matter

713,627 views • 11 months ago

Why would New York Magazine crop out black people from an article on a MAGA event and then portray it as mostly white? , who hosted the event, responds: “I knew that America was getting woke under Biden, but I didn’t know that even the KKK had a DEI program because apparently, I can now be a white supremacist! They truly believe the American people are stupid…they did not reach out to me for comment for this story, they didn’t include me in any party of this story, and they cropped out the black people in the picture of the story. It’s absolutely insane! They cannot stand to see people that believe what we believe HAPPY in this country…they cannot stand it, and they’re scared of it, and they should be scared.”

Why would New York Magazine crop out black people from an article on a MAGA event and then portray it as mostly white? , who hosted the event, responds: “I knew that America was getting woke under Biden, but I didn’t know that even the KKK had a DEI program because apparently, I can now be a white supremacist! They truly believe the American people are stupid…they did not reach out to me for comment for this story, they didn’t include me in any party of this story, and they cropped out the black people in the picture of the story. It’s absolutely insane! They cannot stand to see people that believe what we believe HAPPY in this country…they cannot stand it, and they’re scared of it, and they should be scared.”

Glenn Beck

89,093 views • 1 year ago

David Lean on how to direct actors & shares a funny story that happened during the filming of 'The Bridge on the River Kwai' (1957) "Interviewer: Could you talk about how you work with your actors? Lean: Dangerous subject. Well, it’s intensely personal. I always try not to speak in a loud voice when I’m talking to an actor on the set. I gently take them aside, and I whisper because I don’t want to give the impression, for their sake, that they are being told to do this or that by a teacher. I try as hard as I can to make them suggest something that I want them to think of. The trouble with actors is that it’s a very di cult job with this damned glass eye looking at them all the time. It’s quite di cult talking to all of you here, but I’d rather talk to all of you than I would have a hundred-millimeter lens pointing at me. It’s so concentrated. It’s part of a director’s job, I think, to get the actor to give as good a performance on the stage as he gave to himself in the bath in the morning. So I try to relieve them of their inhibitions. It doesn’t help if you talk from a great height, from a megaphone, as it were. I try to get their confidence. I try to give them confidence. I can’t bear some actors, the rambunctious types who think they know everything. You’ve got to knock them down and make them realize they don’t know everything. If you’ve really done your homework on the script, you, the director, know the part better than any damned actor because you’ve been at it for months. I’ve had lots of actors who want to change dialogue. I see them doing it. I won’t have it. They took on the script and they’ll stick to it. I’m terribly tempted to tell you a rather long story about Sessue Hayakawa. You know, I nd constantly that actors really are not interested in anything but their own parts. We had a scene in 'The Bridge on the River Kwai' (1957) where they had all the troops lined up, and Sessue gets up on the soapbox and talks. We went through a rehearsal, and I said, “What’s wrong?” Because it was the speech and yet it wasn’t the speech. What Sessue had done was to learn all the lines that were only his. He had cut out all the lines that were anybody else’s. The main script was about that thick, and his script was only that thick. He marked only the pages in which he spoke. He had thrown out the rest and bound it together. Now, we came to the scene at the end of the picture. Alec Guinness is looking over the edge of the bridge and he thinks he sees some wires. He goes up to Hayakawa and says, “Colonel Saito, there’s something rather peculiar going on. I think we better go and have a look.” Guinness walked o the bridge, which leads down to the rocks, and Sessue stayed there like a rock. I said, “Go on, Sessue, follow him.” He said, “I follow him?” I said, “Sessue, this is where you nd the wires and where you get killed.” He said, “I get killed?” He had thrown the page away because he had no dialogue. I’ll tell you another story about an actor, though I won’t tell you who it was. He was damn good, but I was kind of dissatisfied. I said, “Look, I understand that an actor is projecting ninety percent to the person he’s playing with, and ten percent is going out toward the camera. I’ve only just realized that you’re putting ninety percent out to the camera, and ten to whom you’re playing with.” It changed his performance immediately." (David Lean's interview to AFI, 1984)

David Lean on how to direct actors & shares a funny story that happened during the filming of 'The Bridge on the River Kwai' (1957) "Interviewer: Could you talk about how you work with your actors? Lean: Dangerous subject. Well, it’s intensely personal. I always try not to speak in a loud voice when I’m talking to an actor on the set. I gently take them aside, and I whisper because I don’t want to give the impression, for their sake, that they are being told to do this or that by a teacher. I try as hard as I can to make them suggest something that I want them to think of. The trouble with actors is that it’s a very di cult job with this damned glass eye looking at them all the time. It’s quite di cult talking to all of you here, but I’d rather talk to all of you than I would have a hundred-millimeter lens pointing at me. It’s so concentrated. It’s part of a director’s job, I think, to get the actor to give as good a performance on the stage as he gave to himself in the bath in the morning. So I try to relieve them of their inhibitions. It doesn’t help if you talk from a great height, from a megaphone, as it were. I try to get their confidence. I try to give them confidence. I can’t bear some actors, the rambunctious types who think they know everything. You’ve got to knock them down and make them realize they don’t know everything. If you’ve really done your homework on the script, you, the director, know the part better than any damned actor because you’ve been at it for months. I’ve had lots of actors who want to change dialogue. I see them doing it. I won’t have it. They took on the script and they’ll stick to it. I’m terribly tempted to tell you a rather long story about Sessue Hayakawa. You know, I nd constantly that actors really are not interested in anything but their own parts. We had a scene in 'The Bridge on the River Kwai' (1957) where they had all the troops lined up, and Sessue gets up on the soapbox and talks. We went through a rehearsal, and I said, “What’s wrong?” Because it was the speech and yet it wasn’t the speech. What Sessue had done was to learn all the lines that were only his. He had cut out all the lines that were anybody else’s. The main script was about that thick, and his script was only that thick. He marked only the pages in which he spoke. He had thrown out the rest and bound it together. Now, we came to the scene at the end of the picture. Alec Guinness is looking over the edge of the bridge and he thinks he sees some wires. He goes up to Hayakawa and says, “Colonel Saito, there’s something rather peculiar going on. I think we better go and have a look.” Guinness walked o the bridge, which leads down to the rocks, and Sessue stayed there like a rock. I said, “Go on, Sessue, follow him.” He said, “I follow him?” I said, “Sessue, this is where you nd the wires and where you get killed.” He said, “I get killed?” He had thrown the page away because he had no dialogue. I’ll tell you another story about an actor, though I won’t tell you who it was. He was damn good, but I was kind of dissatisfied. I said, “Look, I understand that an actor is projecting ninety percent to the person he’s playing with, and ten percent is going out toward the camera. I’ve only just realized that you’re putting ninety percent out to the camera, and ten to whom you’re playing with.” It changed his performance immediately." (David Lean's interview to AFI, 1984)

DepressedBergman

36,391 views • 6 months ago

carlos praising fernando alonso and spanish sports 🇪🇸❤️ 🗣️: what would it feel for you two (carlos and fernando) to give that joy of the world championship in f1 to the spanish people? carlos: well, i think fernando is the right guy to answer this question because he's had the pleasure and the success to give that joy to spanish people, to me when i was following f1 and i was his biggest fan and his biggest supporter and i can only say, yeah, it must be an incredible feeling. i've had my little experience of it by giving a win to spain in f1 and that was, when i heard the national spanish anthem, probably the most emotional moment of my career, standing on the top of the podium, hearing your anthem with your flag behind you, i think that is the thing that any driver or any athlete dreams about. and, yeah, i think we are incredibly lucky in spain. well, you could say lucky, but when you have so many athletes in so many disciplines that are so good for such a relatively small country, it cannot be luck. it needs to be that we are investing well in infrastructure around sports. and when you look and you go to the smallest village in spain, you still see a 25-metre swimming pool, you see a 400-metre running track, you see a football pitch, you see a basketball pitch, you see all kinds of olympic installations, and that's in the smallest village you can imagine. so i think we are a country that invests a lot in sports, and from a very young age. and in the end, it pays off, and it makes me a proud spaniard to see that such a relatively small country is so well represented in any kind of discipline, from motorsports to motogp to tennis to football, masculine and feminine. i don't know. i think we are a very successful country in that way, and it makes me proud.

carlos praising fernando alonso and spanish sports 🇪🇸❤️ 🗣️: what would it feel for you two (carlos and fernando) to give that joy of the world championship in f1 to the spanish people? carlos: well, i think fernando is the right guy to answer this question because he's had the pleasure and the success to give that joy to spanish people, to me when i was following f1 and i was his biggest fan and his biggest supporter and i can only say, yeah, it must be an incredible feeling. i've had my little experience of it by giving a win to spain in f1 and that was, when i heard the national spanish anthem, probably the most emotional moment of my career, standing on the top of the podium, hearing your anthem with your flag behind you, i think that is the thing that any driver or any athlete dreams about. and, yeah, i think we are incredibly lucky in spain. well, you could say lucky, but when you have so many athletes in so many disciplines that are so good for such a relatively small country, it cannot be luck. it needs to be that we are investing well in infrastructure around sports. and when you look and you go to the smallest village in spain, you still see a 25-metre swimming pool, you see a 400-metre running track, you see a football pitch, you see a basketball pitch, you see all kinds of olympic installations, and that's in the smallest village you can imagine. so i think we are a country that invests a lot in sports, and from a very young age. and in the end, it pays off, and it makes me a proud spaniard to see that such a relatively small country is so well represented in any kind of discipline, from motorsports to motogp to tennis to football, masculine and feminine. i don't know. i think we are a very successful country in that way, and it makes me proud.

yoyo

18,933 views • 24 days ago

WATCH: Very newsy exchange at the White House Tuesday afternoon between President Trump and CBS’s Ed O'Keefe about Iran, revealing the U.S. was gifted “a present” from whatever remains of the new/old Iranian regime that is “oil and gas related”.... President Trump: “Do you have another question? You haven’t been here in a while.” O’Keefe: “Well, on Iran, can you give us any more sense of who exactly in Iran it is, either Witkoff or Kushner you’re speaking with?” Trump: “Yeah. We had — I hate to say this in front of these young people — they’re not children. I spoke to most of them. They sound like adults to me. Even though they are sort of children, right? They’ll always be your children. But I hate to say it, but we killed all their leadership. And then they met to choose new leaders, and we killed all of them. And now, we have a new group and we can easily do that. But let’s see how they turn out. It’s — we have, really, regime change. You know, this is a change in the regime because the leaders are all very different than the ones that we started off with that created all those problems. So this was — I think we can say, Jason, this is regime change, right?” O’Keefe: “What makes you trust them?” Trump: “I don’t trust anybody. I don’t trust you. I mean, that’s only because I know you, but if I didn’t know you, I’d probably have more trust. But I don’t trust anyone.” O’Keefe: “Why bother talking to them?” Trump: “Why do you — why do you say that? Why do you say what makes you — do you think I trust them? I don’t trust them.” O’Keefe: “Then why bother talking to them?” Trump: “Because they’re going to make a deal. They’re going to make a deal. They did something yesterday that was amazing. Actually. They gave us a present. And the president arrived today and it was a very big present worth a tremendous amount of money. And I’m not going to tell you what that present is, but it was a very significant prize. And they gave it to us, and they said they were going to give it, so that meant one thing to me. We’re dealing with the right people —” O’Keefe: “Was it nuclear related.” Trump: “No, it wasn’t nuclear related. It was oil and gas related. And it was a very nice thing they did. But what it showed me is that we’re dealing with the right people because, you know, you don’t know because the leadership was killed, all gone. Khamenei, all gone. As the expression goes, the past Supreme Leader and then the new Supreme Leader was racked up at a minimum, racked up pretty good, and everyone else was gone. And then many of the people in the third tier are gone. But we’re dealing with a group of people that I think turn out and the — the present, the gift they made to us was very significant. And they said they were going to do it and it happened. And they’re the only ones that could have done it.”

WATCH: Very newsy exchange at the White House Tuesday afternoon between President Trump and CBS’s Ed O'Keefe about Iran, revealing the U.S. was gifted “a present” from whatever remains of the new/old Iranian regime that is “oil and gas related”.... President Trump: “Do you have another question? You haven’t been here in a while.” O’Keefe: “Well, on Iran, can you give us any more sense of who exactly in Iran it is, either Witkoff or Kushner you’re speaking with?” Trump: “Yeah. We had — I hate to say this in front of these young people — they’re not children. I spoke to most of them. They sound like adults to me. Even though they are sort of children, right? They’ll always be your children. But I hate to say it, but we killed all their leadership. And then they met to choose new leaders, and we killed all of them. And now, we have a new group and we can easily do that. But let’s see how they turn out. It’s — we have, really, regime change. You know, this is a change in the regime because the leaders are all very different than the ones that we started off with that created all those problems. So this was — I think we can say, Jason, this is regime change, right?” O’Keefe: “What makes you trust them?” Trump: “I don’t trust anybody. I don’t trust you. I mean, that’s only because I know you, but if I didn’t know you, I’d probably have more trust. But I don’t trust anyone.” O’Keefe: “Why bother talking to them?” Trump: “Why do you — why do you say that? Why do you say what makes you — do you think I trust them? I don’t trust them.” O’Keefe: “Then why bother talking to them?” Trump: “Because they’re going to make a deal. They’re going to make a deal. They did something yesterday that was amazing. Actually. They gave us a present. And the president arrived today and it was a very big present worth a tremendous amount of money. And I’m not going to tell you what that present is, but it was a very significant prize. And they gave it to us, and they said they were going to give it, so that meant one thing to me. We’re dealing with the right people —” O’Keefe: “Was it nuclear related.” Trump: “No, it wasn’t nuclear related. It was oil and gas related. And it was a very nice thing they did. But what it showed me is that we’re dealing with the right people because, you know, you don’t know because the leadership was killed, all gone. Khamenei, all gone. As the expression goes, the past Supreme Leader and then the new Supreme Leader was racked up at a minimum, racked up pretty good, and everyone else was gone. And then many of the people in the third tier are gone. But we’re dealing with a group of people that I think turn out and the — the present, the gift they made to us was very significant. And they said they were going to do it and it happened. And they’re the only ones that could have done it.”

Curtis Houck

108,556 views • 4 months ago

Robert F. Kennedy Jr.: "To me, it's [JFK's] most important speech. It's one of the most important speeches in American history; the thing that he did that was so unusual in that speech is he talked to the American people and asked them to put themselves in the shoes of the Russians..." "The zeitgeist of our era was that America had won the war and now we were going to rightfully dominate the peace. And he said something very, very different to Americans that challenged that patriotic assumption: He said, no, it was actually the Russians who won the war. They weakened Hitler and made it possible for us to march into Berlin." "And he talked about the suffering of the Russians during the war and to legitimize their security concerns, which nobody was doing... what he was saying to the Americans is, no, they have legitimate security concerns the same as we do, and we need to understand those things." "And he reminded Americans of the suffering that the Russians had endured, unimaginable suffering. One in seven Russians had been killed during World War II. He asked Americans to imagine that all of the land, all of the cities, all of the towns from the East Coast to Chicago had been leveled to rubble, that the forests and fields had been burned. And he said that's what happened to Russia during the war. That's what they sacrificed for us, and they have legitimate security concerns to make sure that never happens again..." "I'm speaking you today because the world is once again at a very similar crossroads. As in my uncle's time, nuclear tensions are at an extreme and dangerous level. As in his time, we have a unique opportunity not only to diffuse those tensions, but to take a radically different path, a path towards peace."

Robert F. Kennedy Jr.: "To me, it's [JFK's] most important speech. It's one of the most important speeches in American history; the thing that he did that was so unusual in that speech is he talked to the American people and asked them to put themselves in the shoes of the Russians..." "The zeitgeist of our era was that America had won the war and now we were going to rightfully dominate the peace. And he said something very, very different to Americans that challenged that patriotic assumption: He said, no, it was actually the Russians who won the war. They weakened Hitler and made it possible for us to march into Berlin." "And he talked about the suffering of the Russians during the war and to legitimize their security concerns, which nobody was doing... what he was saying to the Americans is, no, they have legitimate security concerns the same as we do, and we need to understand those things." "And he reminded Americans of the suffering that the Russians had endured, unimaginable suffering. One in seven Russians had been killed during World War II. He asked Americans to imagine that all of the land, all of the cities, all of the towns from the East Coast to Chicago had been leveled to rubble, that the forests and fields had been burned. And he said that's what happened to Russia during the war. That's what they sacrificed for us, and they have legitimate security concerns to make sure that never happens again..." "I'm speaking you today because the world is once again at a very similar crossroads. As in my uncle's time, nuclear tensions are at an extreme and dangerous level. As in his time, we have a unique opportunity not only to diffuse those tensions, but to take a radically different path, a path towards peace."

COMBATE |🇵🇷

287,322 views • 3 years ago

Love this discourse on tiktok where Americans are laughing at imaginary Europeans that have said they want to walk to stadiums It is so damning for the USA that people just cannot fathom they live in a shithhole, and instead of fixing it, they laugh at others for assuming better

Love this discourse on tiktok where Americans are laughing at imaginary Europeans that have said they want to walk to stadiums It is so damning for the USA that people just cannot fathom they live in a shithhole, and instead of fixing it, they laugh at others for assuming better

Tristanovich🇩🇰

213,724 views • 3 months ago

This young lady was trying to finish her workout in the machine when another woman attempted to kick her off of it because she’s in a rush. The woman claimed the young lady was already on the machine for 10 minutes and felt entitled enough to say that it’s her turn now. What would you do? I would ignore her in hopes she walks away, at least the whole thing is on camera so she can report it. After working out for about 30 years now, I can say that most of the time gym people are pretty chill people. Every so often I see some Karen types beginning to come in and ruin the experience for other people. What I hate is they try to rush me off the machine only for them to sit there and scroll on their phone. I used to avoid the confrontation by just letting them use it, I can always come back to it I would say to myself. After seeing so many of them so comfortable with imposing their will on others I now just ignore them, I won’t even acknowledge them, that’s why I have headphones on anyways, it’s my excuse to ignore them without being rude. It doesn’t make sense to me by getting out of their way when I was first. I understand if I was on there for a long time then maybe I will let them go first but the way I see it, I am every bit entitled to use it when I get there first, I shouldn’t have to get out of the way just because they want me to. Would you do the same? I would like to think most people would agree with me on this matter.

This young lady was trying to finish her workout in the machine when another woman attempted to kick her off of it because she’s in a rush. The woman claimed the young lady was already on the machine for 10 minutes and felt entitled enough to say that it’s her turn now. What would you do? I would ignore her in hopes she walks away, at least the whole thing is on camera so she can report it. After working out for about 30 years now, I can say that most of the time gym people are pretty chill people. Every so often I see some Karen types beginning to come in and ruin the experience for other people. What I hate is they try to rush me off the machine only for them to sit there and scroll on their phone. I used to avoid the confrontation by just letting them use it, I can always come back to it I would say to myself. After seeing so many of them so comfortable with imposing their will on others I now just ignore them, I won’t even acknowledge them, that’s why I have headphones on anyways, it’s my excuse to ignore them without being rude. It doesn’t make sense to me by getting out of their way when I was first. I understand if I was on there for a long time then maybe I will let them go first but the way I see it, I am every bit entitled to use it when I get there first, I shouldn’t have to get out of the way just because they want me to. Would you do the same? I would like to think most people would agree with me on this matter.

SonnyBoy🇺🇸

308,615 views • 27 days ago

Kamala Harris: We cannot despair. We cannot despair. The nature of a democracy is such that I think there's a duality. On the one hand, there's an incredible strength when our democracy is intact. An incredible strength in what it does to protect the freedoms and rights of its people. Oh, there's great strength in that. And it is very fragile. It is only as strong as our willingness to fight for it. And so that's the moment we're in. And I say do not despair because in a democracy, as long as we can keep it, in our democracy the people, every individual has the power to make a decision about what this will be. And so let's not feel powerless. Because then we have been defeated. And that's not our character as the American people. We are not one to be defeated. We rise to a moment and we stand on broad shoulders of people who have fought this fight before for our country. And in many ways let us look at the challenge then that we are being presented and not be overwhelmed by it. The baton is now in our hands, to fight for, not against, but for this country we love.

Kamala Harris: We cannot despair. We cannot despair. The nature of a democracy is such that I think there's a duality. On the one hand, there's an incredible strength when our democracy is intact. An incredible strength in what it does to protect the freedoms and rights of its people. Oh, there's great strength in that. And it is very fragile. It is only as strong as our willingness to fight for it. And so that's the moment we're in. And I say do not despair because in a democracy, as long as we can keep it, in our democracy the people, every individual has the power to make a decision about what this will be. And so let's not feel powerless. Because then we have been defeated. And that's not our character as the American people. We are not one to be defeated. We rise to a moment and we stand on broad shoulders of people who have fought this fight before for our country. And in many ways let us look at the challenge then that we are being presented and not be overwhelmed by it. The baton is now in our hands, to fight for, not against, but for this country we love.

Acyn

343,187 views • 1 year ago

Emily Blunt now believes in UFOs after researching for Disclosure Day “This certainly sparked the fires of my imagination when I started researching everything to do with people who have had these experiences from the congressional hearings that had taken place, every documentary, the docuseries. I think that the thing that I was struck by was how inarguable it seemed to me that people were lying. There was this absolute peaceful truth pouring out of them. They know what they saw. They believe it. Even if they've been discredited, disvalued, kicked out, lost their jobs, accused of being whistleblowers, they believe it. There was a sort of universal peacefulness, I think, in all of them as to what they had seen and that they had been awe struck by it and shifted by it. I just found it very healing actually watching all of these people talk about this otherworldly experience that they had. And I think it would be a very good thing for human beings to question their place in the universe. I think it might be an arrogant thing to assume that we know everything, that we're alone. I mean, they just discovered a thousand new species in our oceans this year on Earth. So, why would we imagine that we know everything that's out there in the universe?”

Emily Blunt now believes in UFOs after researching for Disclosure Day “This certainly sparked the fires of my imagination when I started researching everything to do with people who have had these experiences from the congressional hearings that had taken place, every documentary, the docuseries. I think that the thing that I was struck by was how inarguable it seemed to me that people were lying. There was this absolute peaceful truth pouring out of them. They know what they saw. They believe it. Even if they've been discredited, disvalued, kicked out, lost their jobs, accused of being whistleblowers, they believe it. There was a sort of universal peacefulness, I think, in all of them as to what they had seen and that they had been awe struck by it and shifted by it. I just found it very healing actually watching all of these people talk about this otherworldly experience that they had. And I think it would be a very good thing for human beings to question their place in the universe. I think it might be an arrogant thing to assume that we know everything, that we're alone. I mean, they just discovered a thousand new species in our oceans this year on Earth. So, why would we imagine that we know everything that's out there in the universe?”

Red Panda Koala

56,336 views • 2 months ago

Michelangelo Antonioni on his experience working in America, the tendency of Americans to waste things & the difficulties he faced while working with American Cameramen: "My autonomy, I would say, is complete. They leave me free to do what I want. The only thing now is that they are starting to be worried about the budget. They ask me why the film is so expensive, but that's what I'm going to ask them. I don't know why it's so expensive, I really don't know. I have a crew that is only half the size of what is usual in America because I don't want a big crew. It seems to me I'm seeing such a waste of money. It seems to be almost immoral. I feel bad sometimes. For instance, they threw away a piece of gelatin that we used and the piece was still new. There is also a waste of film. If I am shooting with two or three cameras and I need this camera only in the middle of the scene, in Italy I would start with that camera just at that moment. Not here. They start from the beginning. It is a waste of film! They are consumers. They are used to wasting something — goods, materials, food, everything. And I'm not used to this. I have some elements of this crew who are not so young — some older people who worked, for instance, on the first film of Greta Garbo, the first 'Ben-Hur' (1925), on Stroheim's 'Greed' (1924). It is very amusing to talk to them about these things. I had a lot of problems with unions, and in Hollywood this is much more difficult than in New York. The unions are so strong. There are lots of old people. You can't find what you are looking for. I needed some cameramen and some assistant cameramen —some young people used to shooting in the modern way, people who can zoom without your having to tell them the exact distance from the actors to the camera, people who can make changes on their own and who can sometimes do what they want. I want them to do that, to do something different from the script, maybe. At that critical moment, the assistant cameraman has to make the decision, but the American cameraman can't do this. That's why I was forced to bring some people from Italy. I don't know why, but English people are much more familiar to me. At the time I was making 'Blow-Up' (1966), at least, they were so mad —in a positive and very pleasant way —that they were almost Neapolitan (that's a joke). I like them, I like English people much more than Americans. I mean I find myself closer to them. The Americans are so cool sometimes. They need to know exactly what they are doing. Sometimes they are like Germans —fastidious, precise. This makes me upset because I like to have people around me who are more spontaneous." (Michelangelo Antonioni's interview with Marsha Kinder, 1968) On this day, 56 years ago, 'Zabriskie Point' (1970) premiered in New York City, USA.

Michelangelo Antonioni on his experience working in America, the tendency of Americans to waste things & the difficulties he faced while working with American Cameramen: "My autonomy, I would say, is complete. They leave me free to do what I want. The only thing now is that they are starting to be worried about the budget. They ask me why the film is so expensive, but that's what I'm going to ask them. I don't know why it's so expensive, I really don't know. I have a crew that is only half the size of what is usual in America because I don't want a big crew. It seems to me I'm seeing such a waste of money. It seems to be almost immoral. I feel bad sometimes. For instance, they threw away a piece of gelatin that we used and the piece was still new. There is also a waste of film. If I am shooting with two or three cameras and I need this camera only in the middle of the scene, in Italy I would start with that camera just at that moment. Not here. They start from the beginning. It is a waste of film! They are consumers. They are used to wasting something — goods, materials, food, everything. And I'm not used to this. I have some elements of this crew who are not so young — some older people who worked, for instance, on the first film of Greta Garbo, the first 'Ben-Hur' (1925), on Stroheim's 'Greed' (1924). It is very amusing to talk to them about these things. I had a lot of problems with unions, and in Hollywood this is much more difficult than in New York. The unions are so strong. There are lots of old people. You can't find what you are looking for. I needed some cameramen and some assistant cameramen —some young people used to shooting in the modern way, people who can zoom without your having to tell them the exact distance from the actors to the camera, people who can make changes on their own and who can sometimes do what they want. I want them to do that, to do something different from the script, maybe. At that critical moment, the assistant cameraman has to make the decision, but the American cameraman can't do this. That's why I was forced to bring some people from Italy. I don't know why, but English people are much more familiar to me. At the time I was making 'Blow-Up' (1966), at least, they were so mad —in a positive and very pleasant way —that they were almost Neapolitan (that's a joke). I like them, I like English people much more than Americans. I mean I find myself closer to them. The Americans are so cool sometimes. They need to know exactly what they are doing. Sometimes they are like Germans —fastidious, precise. This makes me upset because I like to have people around me who are more spontaneous." (Michelangelo Antonioni's interview with Marsha Kinder, 1968) On this day, 56 years ago, 'Zabriskie Point' (1970) premiered in New York City, USA.

DepressedBergman

39,982 views • 6 months ago

#WATCH | Chandigarh | Jaswinder Kaur Bath, wife of Colonel Pushpinder Singh Bath, who was allegedly assaulted by Punjab Police personnel in Patiala, says, "We went to meet DGP Gaurav Yadav, but he was busy. We waited for one and a half hours, but then he left without meeting us. He is an army officer's son, but he still did so... I am raising my voice just because my son said that he would not stay in this country as it is not worth staying. I had to prove to him that justice would be given... Then, we went to meet the governor, and he had tears in his eyes when I spoke to him and when I showed him the pictures and the brutality. He called the DGP and told him that FIR is my right with all the names and to please do what is needed. The governor then told us that if the FIR is not registered, we should get back to him. I want to thank the governor for standing up with us. I came to know through the media that SSP Nanak Singh had said that a magisterial inquiry had been set up, but the FIR could not be changed... Today, when everyone was standing up with me, all the politicians started calling me, but I didn't pick up a single call as this was not a political fight. They cannot say that we were under the influence of alcohol as it is there in the (medical) report of a government hospital... A police inspector told me that we cannot add the names of some police personnel in the FIR as they have been awarded as encounter specialists by the DIG and are about to be promoted. They said that police will do the needful but cannot name them in FIR ..." (21/03)

#WATCH | Chandigarh | Jaswinder Kaur Bath, wife of Colonel Pushpinder Singh Bath, who was allegedly assaulted by Punjab Police personnel in Patiala, says, "We went to meet DGP Gaurav Yadav, but he was busy. We waited for one and a half hours, but then he left without meeting us. He is an army officer's son, but he still did so... I am raising my voice just because my son said that he would not stay in this country as it is not worth staying. I had to prove to him that justice would be given... Then, we went to meet the governor, and he had tears in his eyes when I spoke to him and when I showed him the pictures and the brutality. He called the DGP and told him that FIR is my right with all the names and to please do what is needed. The governor then told us that if the FIR is not registered, we should get back to him. I want to thank the governor for standing up with us. I came to know through the media that SSP Nanak Singh had said that a magisterial inquiry had been set up, but the FIR could not be changed... Today, when everyone was standing up with me, all the politicians started calling me, but I didn't pick up a single call as this was not a political fight. They cannot say that we were under the influence of alcohol as it is there in the (medical) report of a government hospital... A police inspector told me that we cannot add the names of some police personnel in the FIR as they have been awarded as encounter specialists by the DIG and are about to be promoted. They said that police will do the needful but cannot name them in FIR ..." (21/03)

ANI

196,239 views • 1 year ago