Sensitive content

This media may contain sensitive content.

Video yükleniyor...

Video Yüklenemedi

Ana Sayfaya Dön

Full video here Another great scene with a handsome guy from Prague from the Street Hunting series by William Higgins studio #boys #publicsex #dick #big #streethunting #twink #xxl #fyp #gay #bi #czechhunter #gayporn #straight #discreet #public #blindfold #kink #williamhiggins #bigdick #bigcock #cock #williamhiggins #promo #cumshot #twink #realporn

0 Yorum

Yorum bulunmuyor

Orijinal gönderinin yorumları burada görünecek

Benzer Videolar

Remembering film director Lloyd Bacon on his Birthday Born | December 4, 1889 in San Jose, California, USA Died | November 15, 1955 aged 65 in Burbank, California, USA Video | The “By a Waterfall” production number from Footlight Parade (1933) featuring 300 choreographed swimmers. One of the workhorses in Warner Brothers' stable of directors in the 1930s, Lloyd Bacon didn't have a career as loaded with classic films as many of his more famous contemporaries. What few “classics” he had his hand in (42nd Street (1933), Footlight Parade (1933) are so overshadowed by the dazzling surrealistic choreography of Busby Berkeley that casual film buffs today often forget they were actually directed by Bacon. While his resume lacks the drama of failed productions and tales of an unbridled ego, he consistently enriched the studio's coffers, directing a handful of its biggest hits of the late 1920s and 1930s. Bacon's career amounts to that of a competent ― and at times brilliant ― director who did the best with the material handed to him in assembly-line fashion. Lloyd Bacon was born into a theatrical family (his father was Frank Bacon, a playwright and stage actor). His parents enlisted all the Bacon children onto the stage. Despite having a strong interest in law as a student at Santa Clara College, Lloyd opted for an acting career after appearing in a student production of “The Passion Play”. In 1911 he joined David Belasco's Los Angeles Stock Company (with Lewis Stone), touring the country and gaining good notices in a Broadway run of the hit “Cinderella Man”, and gaining further experience during a season of vaudeville. He switched gears in 1915 and took a stab at silent Hollywood, playing the heavy in several of Gilbert M. 'Broncho Billy' Anderson's shorts and pulling double duty as a stunt man. With America's entry into World War I in 1917, Bacon enlisted in the Navy and was assigned to the Photo Department. This began a lifelong admiration for the service and might explain the Navy being a favourite recurring theme in many of his films. After the war's end Bacon moved from Mutual (Charles Chaplin's studio at the time) to Triangle as a comedy actor. It was at this point that he got his first taste of directing ― he had let everyone at the studio know he had an interest in helming a picture, and when the director of a now forgotten Lloyd Hamilton comedy short fell ill, Bacon was given his chance. Constantly moving, he joined tightwad producer Mack Sennett as a gag writer. Sennett, sensing a bargain, happily accommodated Lloyd's desire to become a full-time director by early 1921. The Sennett studio was already in an irreversible decline during Bacon's tenure there but it allowed the novice director to gain a wealth of experience. He apprenticed for Sennett until joining Warner Brothers in 1925, an association that would last a remarkable 18 years and begin when the working-man's studio was building a strong stable of contract directors that included Michael Curtiz, Alan Crosland, John G. Adolfi and Mervyn LeRoy. Although Lloyd never became known for a particular style other than a well-placed close up, his ability to bring in an entertaining film on time and within budget earned him such enormous respect from the five Warner Brothers that he was soon handed control over important projects, including The Singing Fool (1928), Al Jolson's follow-up to The Jazz Singer (1927), which grossed an unheard-of (for Warners, at least) $4,000,000 in domestic receipts alone ― the studio's #1 hit for 1928. Bacon was rewarded by becoming the highest paid director on the studio lot, earning over $200,000 a year throughout the Depression. He was called upon to direct the studio's big-budget production of Moby Dick (1930), which garnered good notices, but it's a version that's barely remembered today. The 1930s saw Bacon assigned to the assembly line; aside from the Busby Berkeley-choreographed films, he directed many of James Cagney's crowd-pleasing two-week wonders, including Picture Snatcher (1933) (Cagney once remarked that the schedule on that picture was so tight that, one time after he and the cast had rehearsed a particular scene, Cagney said, “OK, Lloyd, are you ready to shoot?” Bacon grinned and said, “I just did!”) and The Irish in Us (1935). As a reward, he was occasionally afforded more time and money on productions such as Here Comes the Navy (1934) and Devil Dogs of the Air (1935). He also directed Cagney's return effort after his ill-advised move to cheapjack Grand National Pictures after one of his periodic salary disputes with studio head Jack L. Warner ― the badly miscast if frenetic Boy Meets Girl (1938). This was one of Cagney's least critically acclaimed Warner Brothers films of the 1930s, but a smash hit for the studio. During his years at Warners, Bacon gained a reputation as a clothes horse, the dapper director arriving on the set dressed to the nines, wearing expensive hats that he would hurl around the set when expressing his dissatisfaction (he ruined a lot of hats) at an actor's performance or missed cue. Bacon continued to turn out profitable films for the studio until moving to 20th Century-Fox in 1944 (a logical move, since the recently discharged Darryl F. Zanuck knew Bacon from his early days at Warners). He stayed at Fox until 1949, then bounced among Columbia, Fox, Universal and finally the chaotically-run RKO in 1954. He worked virtually until his death from a cerebral hemorrhage at age 65.

Hollywood Golden Age of Cinema

39,801 görüntüleme • 10 ay önce

"Come on, folks. Do we see what's playing out here? Marbury v. Mad might have just brought down the Commissioner of the Boston Police Department." - Towel, November 6, 2025 Rule #1 in Massachusetts politics right now; Do not mess with Attorney Corey Hopkins. She's going to get barred here just to reform the government (then I'll become her paralegal and we'll submit public records requests all day). Good plan. TRANSCRIPT (from Towel's coverage of the letter in question, uncovered by Attorney Hopkins); Hello and good evening. It is just past 6 p.m. on Monday, November 3rd, 2025. My name is Grant Smith-Ellis, and I'm back with you again for another developing news update, this time related to Boston Police Commissioner Cox responding to a developing series of scandals, in particular related to former Boston Police Officer—well, first former Canton Police Officer, then former Boston Police Officer—Kelly Dever. Now, Kelly Dever was an integral witness during the John O'Keefe and Karen Read trial about one specific series of events in the early morning of January 29, 2022—not really related to John's death per se, but related to the then-chief of the Canton Police Department, Ken Berkowitz, who was also potentially the person that went to the FBI about Brian Tully's MSP unit, Massachusetts State Police unit, detailed to the Norfolk DA, who were the same people that investigated Karen Read for John's death. Berkowitz was the same person who apparently went to the FBI in 2022 about Tully's unit through John Fanning covering up Sandra Birchmore's death at the hands of former Stoughton PD officer Matthew Farwell. Okay, Ken Berkowitz and Brian Higgins—then undercover ATF agent who himself had been in a relationship of some kind, we'll call it that, with Karen in the months before John's death. That's a whole story we will not get into. The point is, Higgins and Berkowitz go into the sally port. Now, Kelly Dever had been working since, I think it was 12 a.m. on January 28th. She worked—let me make sure I get this right now—she worked at 12 p.m., noon on January 28th to 8 p.m. Then she worked the 8 p.m. to 4 a.m. shift. Okay, she was doing 16 hours over those two days. At like 1:30 a.m., she saw Berkowitz and Higgins—or around there, maybe a little later—go into the area, an area of the Canton PD. Then—and we're going to find out—she had a meeting with Boston Police Commissioner Cox. Now, why did Commissioner Cox get himself in trouble? Well, not because of the interview we're going to watch, but instead because of an interview about a year ago where he said he knew nothing about the Kelly Dever situation or the Karen Read case. All right, now we're going to quickly come to find out that what we're about to hear from the commissioner is not the best answer in light of this little document found by the incredible Marbury v. Madison on X, Corey A. Hopkins, a business litigator based in North Carolina. Towel really likes Marbury v. Madison because, first of all, Marbury v. Madison is an awesome case, and it entrenched the supremacy of the judiciary as to saying what the law is by virtue of the Constitution. Solved a very complex problem related to the Judiciary Act of 1789 and, in particular, the emergence of political parties in 1796 and, in particular, 1800, and a slew of last-minute appointments by President Adams and a refusal by President Jefferson to commission—or one of the refusal by Jefferson's Secretary of State Madison to commission a justice of the peace. But it really was about the supremacy of the judiciary branch. Marbury v. Madison uses a lot of FOIAs, and what you're going to see right here is a FOIA request that resulted in this wonderful little document. And what does this show? All right, this document shows, folks, a letter from Stephen J. Kelleher, who's with the White Collar Public Corruption and Civil Rights Division of the FBI in Boston. It is a letter that Marbury v. Madison obtained via a FOIA, and it shows the DOJ reaching out to Commissioner Cox and saying, "Sir, hope all is well. Just a reminder—this was on February 22nd, 2024. The documents were released to the DA's office late last night." This has to do with federal documents about the investigation of John's death by the MSP unit run by Brian Tully working for the Norfolk DA. "The officer we spoke about is Kelly Dever. If you have any questions at all, feel free to call me. Vr. Steve." Okay, folks, this proves that Commissioner Cox was told about Kelly Dever and documents related to her testimony and what she saw Higgins and Berkowitz doing—which I don't think was related to John's death, but it's just embarrassing for Higgins. He was an undercover ATF agent, and embarrassing for Berkowitz. And although Berkowitz is now dead, he was either dying or not dead in 2024. And clearly, this was embarrassing, okay, to the Canton Police Chief, to the Boston Police, to Higgins, to all these people. All right. And so we see here, Cox knows about it. Cox then goes on a few months later—I think it was either after, I think it was right after Karen's second trial, but it was some months after this initial email was sent to Cox. And Cox, in his infinite wisdom, tells Boston 25 or Channel 5 or whatever it was at a news conference that he's basically never heard of Kelly Dever or the Karen Read and John O'Keefe case. Okay, that was a stupid thing to say because then this FOIA comes out in recent weeks. That leads to Alan Jackson to send a Brady letter to Mayor Michelle Wu, the Democratic mayor of Boston running unopposed in the coming election, saying that Cox should be on the Brady list. I think it was—yes, because Cox was not forthcoming about what he was told by the feds about Dever. Okay, now this is Cox's response. I just want to show you how bad of a response this is. Okay, this is a clip via Boston 25, just Cox's comment on these new developments, which—although Alan Jackson's Brady letter is what Cox was asked for comment on—even Alan Jackson himself has rightfully so given credit to Marbury v. Madison for their excellent find on this FOIA document that was unearthed. And this could cost Cox his position. All right, the Democrats in Boston already have the eye of President Trump. The DOJ is all over this unit, in my opinion, and the cover-up of Birchmore's death. Look at the DOJ's pattern of indictments, okay? Recently, not just the Jessica LeClair leaks, but also Sheriff Tompkins and other major Democrats. Look at what's going on here, folks. Think about the larger picture—the most recent indictment, the superseding indictment of Matt Farwell for the murder of Sandra Birchmore's unborn child. It's all coming together. And Commissioner Cox's answer is bad. And that's why I want to analyze it. It's not just like inappropriate. It is a bad, bad, bad answer. When I heard it, I had to immediately make a video to analyze it because that's how bad this answer is. It's short, but I'm going to tell you how bad it is after we listen to it. "But what I need, you know, it's not to be asked this question ever again because it's not—it has to pertain to anything to do with the police department. My condolences to the O'Keefe family for, you know, what they've gone through. And because we did lose a department member. But outside of that, this has nothing to do with us. And I'm not going to speak with this again." Okay, let me just make something clear. I'm not saying he was wrong. It's not wrong to invoke John's name. But doing it that way—that's grotesque. Okay, he didn't answer the question. He basically refused to do so. And again, if you didn't hear the statement—although I'm sure you did—he said, "What I need is to not be asked this question ever again pertaining to anything to do with the police department." What? "My condolences to the O'Keefe family for what they've gone through because we did lose a department member." John O'Keefe was an honorable member of the Boston PD and the SA offenders unit. "But outside of that, this has nothing to do with us, the Boston PD, and I'm not going to speak on this again." No, no, no, no—that you just cost yourself your job right there. I'm sorry. That was a terrible, terrible answer. I'm sorry for the volume. I'm just running it back. Terrible answer. The worst possible answer. You may well have just cost yourself your job because you ducked the question. Everyone knows that the question is about this document. Anyone following this knows. The implications are what Dever knew about Berkowitz and Higgins, and maybe that's not the most serious thing. But as President Nixon said, it is not the crime, it's the cover-up. Dever, whatever she did—not wanting to talk about certain things about Higgins and Berkowitz, unrelated to John's death, just because it's kind of embarrassing—that is not a problem really. It's a minor thing. You know what's a big deal? Dever definitely got Brady-listed or whatever because her testimony was a little weird. I think Alan Jackson also pressured her a little bit. But whatever, that's not the point here. Cox's response—that was bad. That was bad PR. That's like the kind of thing when Prince Andrew was forced to go out and do an interview with BBC One about Epstein, and it just cost him all his titles because he got no PR help; he got sandbagged. That kind of thing—somebody didn't prep him, or the people he was talking to didn't even think this would come up. That's a horrible answer. Twenty seconds can cost you your career if you have done something bad and you answer a tough question like that. It's defensive; it shows you have something to hide; it undermines people's faith in your ability to answer those kind of questions. That's the biggest problem for Commissioner Cox here. Instead of inspiring confidence and making it look like it was nothing or it was just a routine, he couldn't even address the fact that he was made aware in February, in particular, about Kelly Dever and he had knowledge—he had a meeting with her. Let's be clear: He put her on his schedule the very next day. Not only did he have recipient knowledge of what was going on with the federal investigation and the John O'Keefe and Karen Read case—Dever got called into his office the next day, which of course Cox initially tried to play off as just some routine meeting, as if he meets with all 2,600 or whatever of the Boston police force. No. Come on, folks. Come on, folks. Do we see what's playing out here? Marbury v. Madison might have just brought down the Commissioner of the Boston Police Department. My name is Grant Smith-Ellis. Enjoy the rest of your Monday. We'll see what other news comes in today. Sean Good on suspension. Michael Proctor's cell phone gate engulfing the world in a conflagration. Little towel basically running down the street from the masses, trying to insulate himself from the fallout of this God-forsaken situation. Institutional reform is coming—to the Norfolk DA, hopefully throughout the state police—so that the good people in law enforcement can keep helping the vulnerable and that the exploited, no matter how much pressure they come under, continue to speak their truth. And let me just say this: Whenever we stand against the flow of opinion on hotly contested issues, a man, a woman, and a Towel—do what they must in spite of the personal consequences, in spite of the dangers and obstacles and pressures. For that is the basis of all human morality. We will be there for each other in times of struggle. We will be side by side in times of joy. And when everything is on the line and when our principles matter the most, there will be no price too high to pay to center the voices of the unheard, to bring justice to the vulnerable, and to reform this God-forsaken justice system in Massachusetts so that we can all hand down a structural system to our future generations that is worthy of our Constitution, that is worthy of our collective intelligence, and that is worthy of the due reverence we all should be providing to the pursuit of justice. My name is Grant Smith-Ellis. Until next time, you're a towel, I am as well. Be well. God bless.

Grant Smith Ellis

13,006 görüntüleme • 9 ay önce

how I’m building fractl for a $10M exit in 6 months, so I can produce my dream musical 🎤🎬 I don't know how 🤷🏼‍♀️ That's what the show is about ha. Figuring it out, in real time. Wish me luck lol fractl's new docu-series ‘‘The Crypto Hustle’ launches feb 26. Final-fucking-ly. thank you Superteam Canada & Solana for the funding and for making Episode 1 possible 🥰 For those of you who are new here, hiiii 🙋🏼‍♀️ my name is Rime Salmi, I'm an artist who accidentally built the biggest investor network in web3. And now we're producing a 12 episode documentary about how I'm working my way back to being an artist, with funding. the origin story. when I crashed with the last crypto cycle, back to zero (plus tax) at my grown age, I had to ask myself what the hell I was gonna do with my life. I always just wanted be an artist. With agency. So i worked and paid for everything, studio, music videos, started a record label, all that to keep my artistic freedom, for my entire career. Had some success, lots of failed experiments, lots of tears, and lots of fun. After I lost everything to the terra luna crash (mistakes were made 🥲), I had to figure out how I would fund the dream next. I needed a break from the emotional roller coaster of trading crypto, so I went back to school for the grant money (thank you government of Canada). I relocated to madrid for a change, and started making tiktoks. Skits that I thought were funny. Skits that i thought were risky but honest and necessary. I’ve always loved saying out loud what others are ashamed to even think 🤓 if you follow me on ig or tt you know ha I was having a blast. Creating all day. Some tiktoks took off. Ones that felt very personal. I felt seen. I was at my happiest, filming, editing, singing and pretending to listen in class, for the grant money. Then it hit me. That's what i want. I wanna be telling stories. I dont wanna be just a singer, just a songwriter, just an actress waiting for auditions to come my way. I wanna do it all, tell more stories, write and produce them. so…A musical? But I hate musicals 😭 why do they start singing in the middle of a conversation?!? whyyyyy A musical for people who don't like musicals??!!! 🥹 That’s it!! A MUSICAL FOR PEOPLE WHO DONT LIKE MUSICALS 🤩 DONE. So from the lowest of my finances, in the middle of career confusion, with a bruised ego from failing so miserably at my first crypto cycle, I found something great to get excited about for the rest of my life. I needed to validate the feasibility… because I know I’m a dreamer who gets shit done, but I’m very much a idealist. so I asked my good friend of mine and the producer of my first 2 albums Benny Adam (now a rising star, this is me clout chasing) for advice. I asked him: ‘is this too much? For me to wanna produce a whole as* Netflix series, music and all?? He’s the most talented, ambitious yet realistic guy I know. And I knew he would tell it to me like it is, but kindly. Because he’s also a nice human 🫶🏽 ‘So?? Is it too big of a project??’ He paused… I looked at him, hopeful 🥹 ‘Ya. It’s a reeeally big project 😕’, he said. Fuck. and then he paused, again. Just tell me, I thought. Tell me aaaall the reasons this is a bad idea… 😞 beat. ‘But if anyone can do it, it’s you’ cue inspiring battle field music Reeeallyyyyy? 🥹 I teared up. I’m tearing up now writing this. Because at that low point in my life, that’s what I needed. Just one person who really knew me, to remind me, despite my circumstances, of who I am and what I’m capable of. That I’m crazy, yes, but in a good way 👉🏽👈🏽 Shokran Benny. I don’t think you know how much that meant to me (I’m gonna tell him again because he’s on episode 4 of the Crypto Hustle ha) Ok. So. Musical it is. When I ran out of back-to-school government money, and needed to be an adult again, I reintegrated the crypto space, with a purpose. I called my friend and mentor Armando Pantoja and asked him what he thought I should go for in terms of job (I needed a break from entrepreneurship). He said ‘I’ve seen you at conferences, you’re really good with people, you know marketing, and you actually understand crypto. He said go to conferences, you’ll figure it out. Just show up’ I did. I showed up to eth denver 2022 and I started the first iteration of what became fractl as an influencer marketing agency, because I saw a good skill-market fit and because I couldn't find a job lol but I hated it. I dont wanna manage influencers, I don't wanna manage artists. I’m an artist, I would never manage me, that's crazy 😂 One thing led to the other I became a fractional CMO. An opinionated one 🤓 I found myself always trying to lead founders towards personal storytelling… suggesting they put themselves out there more. I really believed that it would help them build trust in a space that so desperately needs it. Then, I started hosting our investor events (to get leads for the agency), and saw the struggle of founders building and fundraising at the same time and the original idea for this show started to form. We need bolder marketing in this space. What if we followed these founders around the world at all these conferences and followed their journey, building a company, raising, launching a token, failing. In these ruthless markets, with the drama of personal sacrifices… I could see it so clearly 😃 So I started pitching it. THE BEST MARKETING CAMPAIGN EVER GUYS!! WHO'S IN?? No one. I couldn't convince a single founder of the vision.🥲 Maybe I wasn’t qualified enough in their eyes to carry out such a big vision, following multiple founders on a 6 month production around the world. They were probably right lol But I’m also a little crazy. And really really stubborn. That's something right?? A few months later, inspiration still strong, I told pablo erminy who's worked on multiple Netflix shows about it and he said: ‘why dont you just tell YOUR story? You have a great story, people will wanna watch you build in public to fund your artist dream. As a first reality tv production, one story is more than enough to handle.’ Wise man. Maybe i did underestimate how complex a multi-lead, international, real-time, film production would be 😬 Done. because I know great advice when I hear it. PIVOT! 🛋️ So that’s how ’The Crypto Hustle’ was born. This journey I was trying to sell to other founders, I would do it for myself. show not tell. Now the funding. I tried selling the project to sponsors on and off for over a year, between the normal fractl operations, hiring, training, firing, messing up, learning. And only ended up spreading myself so thin, that I neglected the core business. Company became a mess (for others reasons too, that I will come up on the show, hint: boys) Bottom line is, we lost more money than we made, trying to sell a show. I should've known. Film fundraising is a producer’s full time job lol Fast forward 1 year, 2 pilots and a near bankruptcy later, I’m now launching Episode 1 from Korea and just wrapping episode 2 from Hong Kong. No funding. (except for Episode 1, thank you again Superteam Canada 🥰) Fuck it. Might not be the big production I had envisioned, but all the core principles and the emotions, and team talent is there.. An MVP. Now. because waiting for things to align would just delay this indefinitely. And because I have more conviction than ever. not only in authentic storytelling as the best marketing, but also because my soul needs this. I need creativity to keep going. If i stay too long in business mode without publishing art, stories, songs, dances, funny skits, I find no reason to wake up in the morning. Not to be dramatic, but I really only wanna be an artist 😂 Also, the timing IS ideal. because in my mess, I got lucky 🥰 I found a production team that felt right instantly. Love at first meeting. not only are they aligned with the docu-series concept, but with the end vision too. The cultural impact I wanna have with the musical. vegetable Badr, Momo, @JuicySocialAgency, you're my favorite part of 2026 🫶🏽 So here we are. About to launch episode 1. Documenting the process of building fractl for a $10M exit in 6 MONTHS, so i can produce my dream musical 🥰 It’s about to be epic. Or a massive failure, in public. can girl with the pink hair make this happen? 👀 let the adventure begin 💚☺️ full episodes will be on my youtube channel. go subscribe ok?

🌸 Rime Salmi 🌸

11,291 görüntüleme • 7 ay önce

Ch. 14 of NITRO: The Inside Story of Hulk Hogan's heel turn - #OTD 30 Years Ago (7/7/96)! AS DAY BECAME NIGHT at the Sullivan home, Bollea deliberated his participation in the pay-per-view. “Everybody was telling him that it was the wrong thing to do,” Kevin Sullivan says. “He was getting booed out of the arena, but they were all saying, ‘this is gonna kill him’.” With no end to the discussion in sight, the wily booker casually suggested that Bollea and Young make use of his two guest rooms until the morning. “I isolated [them],” Sullivan admits. “I was just afraid that at the last minute, he was going to use his creative control [clause] and pull out.” If Sullivan could deliver Bollea to the arena by showtime, the finish of the match called for Hogan to star in the most dramatic of surprise endings. In a sequence devised by Kevin Nash, an unannounced Hulkster would shockingly interfere in the match, but only after the heels gained an unfair advantage through cheating. It would be a brilliant misdirection, Nash thought, as fans would instinctively believe Hogan’s appearance to be in support of the babyface team. “I knew there were gonna be 55 different ideas,” Nash says, thinking back to the eve of the event, “[so] I actually put a lot of thought into it. I called Scott [Hall] two or three days before that, and said ‘what do you think about this?’ “We had to make it a 2-on-2 match with Lex Luger getting injured [during the match] and going out. We would cheat to get Macho [Man] in trouble and all of a sudden Hulk comes down, which of course would mean ‘ok, here comes Hulk to make the save’. [Hall] said, ‘I love it’.” There was, however, the looming possibility that Bollea could reject his turn at the eleventh hour. Thinking ahead, Eric Bischoff developed a contingency plan in which Sting would play the role, ultimately revealing himself - despite not having prior experience with the WWF - as the ‘third man’ instead. “I remember Eric came in to the locker room,” recalls Marcus 'Buff' Bagwell, “and said [to Sting], ‘I wanna talk to you about something’. I could hear them going over the idea, and then when they got done, Sting told me what they were talking about. He said that [Eric said], ‘there are only two guys that could turn heel where it would really matter’. That would be Hogan and Sting.” “He was offering Sting the job first, [as I recall], and Sting didn’t wanna do it. He didn’t really say it wouldn’t work, but he just said, ‘it doesn’t intrigue me. I don’t wanna do it’.” According to Andre Freitas, a special effects artist who worked in costume design and character development for WCW, the proposed Sting swerve was to involve the use of a doppelganger - or ‘phony’ Sting - presumably in an effort to fool fans that the real character had switched sides. “That was their original plan,” says Freitas. “Eric showed me a picture of Jeff Farmer (a lower-card wrestler) and said ‘can you make him Sting?’ I told him that they have similar bodies...then we looked at Sting’s hair and Jeff’s hair...and talked about all that stuff. I did a head cast for [Farmer] and some prosthetic and test make-ups. But when they secured Hogan, we didn’t do [the angle].” ----------- Amazingly, even as Bash at the Beach began, Bischoff continued to consider Plan B. “I remember walking by this perforated wall in the Ocean Center,” divulges Nash, “and Eric said to me, ‘Hulk is with Sullivan, and he’s not sure he’s gonna do it yet’. It was up in the air.” Meanwhile, viewers of the pay-per-view - and, for that matter, WCW’s own production staff - speculated as to the identity of the third man. “They were trying to ‘work’ everyone,” asserts Jason Douglas, a WCW producer backstage at his first pay-per-view event. “‘Rocket’ (staff member Rick Sancher) came up to me - they were kinda testing me because I was new on the road - and said ‘hey, I think it’s gonna be [WWF wrestler] Bret Hart’. I guess it was to see if I would leak something, and so I was just like ‘oh, cool, Bret Hart’.” In reality, aside from Bischoff, Bollea, Young, Hall, Nash and Sullivan, the turn would be concealed from everyone - even the announcers, according to orders from Bischoff - as to ensure their most realistic reactions. With less than an hour before the main event began, production staffer Woody Kearce discovered a revealing clue in the parking lot. A Hulk Hogan motorcycle had appeared mysteriously in one of the spaces, sparking another round of backstage conjecture. Finally, with what Sullivan recalls as “thirty minutes” and Bischoff remembers as “forty-five to sixty minutes” left on the air, Bollea belatedly arrived at the Ocean Center. The mood suddenly changed. Upon realizing that his star had been convinced, Bischoff began to relax. “Once he got to the building, I recall a sense of calm,” he reveals. “All of the anxiety, all of the tension, all of the worry, all of the effort to make sure things stayed quiet...all of that just kind of dissipated. It was like fog lifting when the sun comes out - it all just went away. I was thinking, ‘it is what it is, there’s nothing more I can do...so let’s just roll with it’.” To cement the turn, Bollea knew, he would have to deliver a monumental post-match promo to explain his actions. While typically, he enjoyed using Bischoff as a sounding board to rehearse interviews, the need for complete privacy - on this occasion - was unquestionably paramount. And so, away from prying eyes - and ears - the two met up in the most unglamorous of clandestine locations - a utility closet. In the midst of the run-through, Bischoff stopped to emphasize an important point: When you grab that microphone, I want you to say...‘this is the beginning of the new...world...order’. The phrase - ‘new world order’ - lingered auspiciously in the air. Bischoff surprised himself with the utterance, realizing slowly that the term encapsulated everything that the invasion storyline could represent. In 1990, then-president George H.W. Bush famously utilized the same expression in a speech to Congress, although its origin could actually be traced back to the 28th President, Woodrow Wilson. But if Bischoff was unsure as to the source of his spontaneous inspiration, perhaps the answer could be found closer to home - on the preceding Nitro, just six days earlier, announcer Larry Zybysko serendipitously made the following proclamation: “This Sunday, I promise you, there will be a new world order of wrestling…” Fans at the Ocean Center waited anxiously to see if Zybysko’s prophecy would materialize; for after all the hoopla, it was suddenly time for the main event. Before the opening bell, the audience was already on its feet for ring announcer@Michael_Buffer’s pre-match introductions. As Hall and Nash sauntered to the ring for The Hostile Takeover match, Buffer set the scene with theatrical aplomb: “Ladies and gentleman, at this time, let me introduce the men whose plan and goal is to takeover the WCW with force and hostility. We were told there would be three of these interlopers, and I must apologize as I have been informed - as you can see - there are only two. Ladies and gentleman, introducing...the Outsiiiiiders!” In a moment that played off perfectly on television, Sting’s entrance music began - and quickly ended - as ‘Mean Gene’ Okerlund traipsed cautiously into the ring. After exchanging quizzical looks with Buffer and referee Randy Anderson, Okerlund confronted the Outsiders to get some answers, an inspired plot device designed to build the tension even further. “Gentleman,” began Okerlund, “if I could have your attention...I don’t have police protection with me at this time, but I wanna confront you in front of this full house here at the Ocean Center, and millions of others watching across the country and around the world. I don’t see three men here tonight. Where is your partner?” Responding in a manner consistent with their WWF characters, Hall and Nash assured Okerlund that the third man was present - and ready. “Let me tell you something,” announced a confident Nash, “we got enough to handle it right now, right here.” Once more, Sting’s entrance music blared from the arena speakers, this time preceding the man himself, accompanied by Luger and Savage. “Here we go!” screamed color commentator Bobby Heenan as the wrestlers passed an unusually large contingent of security personnel on the entrance way. “The war is on!” Less than two minutes into the bout, Luger collapsed to the outside, a move in accordance with Nash’s plan to even the sides before the climactic reveal. “Now it’s two against two!” yelled Heenan. After a brief delay, the concerned crowd looked on as Luger left the arena on a stretcher, leaving Sting and Savage alone to fight valiantly for WCW. As the match progressed, the contemptible Outsiders used every trick to stall their opponent’s momentum, until a revitalized Savage began a furious rally at the fifteen-and-a-half minute mark. The invaders were suddenly down, but not out - as with the referee distracted, Nash landed a low-blow to bring the Macho Man to his knees. All four men lay on the canvas, exhausted, as referee Anderson started a ten count. As Anderson yelled ‘ONE’, several rows of spectators rose to their feet. Within seconds, the reaction diffused from section to section, the noise level increasing with each passing beat. On the live broadcast, viewers at home caught glimpse of a familiar figure making his way down the ramp. “Hulkamania!” screamed Dusty Rhodes on commentary while Hogan walked methodically towards the ring. Noticeably, the Hulkster seemed oddly disaffected - even out-of-character - but after exchanging the briefest of glances with the crowd, he continued stride with the din reaching fever pitch. “Whose side is he on?” bellowed Heenan, a question that seemed inexplicable given the history of Hogan’s on-screen persona. “Whose side is he on?” repeated Heenan, who as longtime fans could recall, had opposed Hogan for years as a manager in the WWF. For that reason, the comment flew over the heads of most (but not all) viewers; meanwhile, the live crowd was cheering as if their team had won the World Series. Nash and Hall retreated to the floor as Hogan tore off his shirt, an apparent signal that the archetypal good guy was here to save the day again. “Who’s bad now boys?” taunted play-by-play man Tony Schiavone on commentary, confident that WCW’s honor was no longer in jeopardy. Savage lay prone on the mat as Hogan surveyed the scene. Above the cheapest of cheap seats, peeking through a curtain with palpable anticipation, was Eric Bischoff. “I knew that something big was about to happen,” he recalls. “It was either gonna be a big failure, or a big success.” Seemingly out of nowhere, with his unsuspecting devotees enveloped in celebration, Hulk backed up to the corner. With the coldness of a serial killer, the once-honorable hero shockingly shoved referee Anderson, and executed his patented finishing move - the leg drop - to the helpless Macho Man below. The audience became completely, utterly unglued. “I was standing back with the announcers,” remembers Michelle Baines, newly hired as a production assistant. “One of the producers turned to me and said, ‘you need to go to the back’. “‘I said, ‘what do you mean?’ “She said, ‘it’s gonna get ugly real quick’.” “She was right - the crowd turned ugly quick.” In retrospect, it was clear that even as Hogan’s body approached the canvas - contact with Savage just milliseconds away - the gravity of the assault started to hit home. “What has he done?” questioned a crestfallen Rhodes, “is he the third man? What the hell is going on here?” Heenan was even more direct - “Hulk Hogan has betrayed WCW! He is the third man in this picture!” A breathless Schiavone could barely muster more than three words: Oh My God, he repeated. Oh My God, he continued, as Hogan high-fived a grinning Hall and Nash. The courageous Sting, stumbling to his feet to stop the injustice, was quickly dispatched, and in the coup de grace, Hogan tossed Anderson to the floor. Sardonically, he covered Savage for the pin, the contest now clearly a farce. “I hope you love it,” a disappointed Rhodes wailed on commentary. “You just sold your soul to the devil.” The third man was a mystery no more, and Hall, Nash, and Hogan raised their hands in victory to a genuinely astonished audience. The immediate outrage, which first gave way to shock, was now inspiring unmitigated rage. Simultaneously, the evil trio continued to taunt, pose, and antagonize while the announcers lamented WCW’s future. As Sting and Savage hobbled back to the locker room, a visibly distraught Okerlund returned to conduct an explanatory interview, based around the one Hogan and Bischoff had mapped out earlier. “Mean Gene,” commanded Hogan, “the first thing you need to do is to tell these people to shut up if you wanna hear what I gotta say.” For the next four minutes, Hogan rationalized his turn with remarkable clarity. “The first thing you gotta realize, brother, is this right here is the future of wrestling. You can call this the new...world...order of wrestling. These two men right here came from a great big organization up north, and everybody was wondering who the third man was. Well, who knows more about that organization than me, brother? I made that organization a monster. I made people rich up there. I made the people that ran that organization rich up there. And when it all came to pass, the name Hulk Hogan, the man Hulk Hogan, got bigger than the whole organization!” Bischoff watched from his secretive seat in amazement - he had not seen, nor had anyone, this intensity of emotion on display at a wrestling show before. It was almost as if the assembled masses had lost themselves in the performance, perhaps even forgetting, if only for a moment, that they were witnesses to a pre-determined event. Hogan’s actions had ostensibly interrupted their critical faculties; in other words, they had suspended their disbelief by reacting to the incident as if it were real. Moreover, the shock was manifesting in the most volatile ways imaginable, as in an incident edited out of future showings of the pay-per-view, a rather large man, likely intoxicated, ran into the ring before being knocked down by Hall and Nash. Concurrently, a stream of debris rained down from the stands, with one object hitting Okerlund, and the rest filling the ring in a stunningly unique visual. Hogan continued as the trash piled up around him, even referencing Ted Turner in his diatribe: “Billionaire Ted promised me movies brother. Billionaire Ted promised me millions of dollars. And Billionaire Ted promised me world caliber matches. And as far as Billionaire Ted, Eric Bischoff, and the entire WCW goes, I’m bored brother! That’s why I want these two guys here, these so-called Outsiders. These are the men I want as my friends. They are the new blood of professional wrestling, and not only are we going to take over the whole wrestling business...with Hulk Hogan, the new blood and the monsters with me, we will destroy everything in our path, Mean Gene.” “Look at all the crap in this ring,” responded Okerlund. “This is what’s in the future for you if you want to hang around the likes of this man Hall, and this man Nash.” Hogan raised his finger as if to stop the interviewer midstream, the perfect line instantly coming to mind. “As far as I’m concerned, all this crap in the ring represents these fans out here,” he boomed defiantly. “For two years, I held my head high,” ranted Hogan, alluding to his rather uninspired WCW tenure. “I did everything for the charities. I did everything for the kids. And the reception I got when I came out here, you fans can stick it brother! Because if it wasn’t for Hulk Hogan, you people wouldn’t be here. If it wasn’t for Hulk Hogan, Eric Bischoff would still be selling meat from a truck in Minneapolis. And if it wasn’t for Hulk Hogan, all of these ‘Johnny come latelys’ that you see out here wrestling wouldn’t be here. I was selling the world out, brother, while they were bumming gas to put in their car to get to high school!” In closing, Hogan foreshadowed the future state of affairs in WCW with a prophetic preview of coming storylines: “With Hulk Hogan and the new world organization of wrestling, brother...me and the new blood by my side...whatcha gonna do when the new world organization runs wild on you? Whatcha gonna do? What are you gonna do??” Despite mistakenly bungling the ‘new world order’ phrase at the conclusion of his speech, Hogan still provided the perfect punctuation to a sensational heel turn. His promo, inarguably the most dynamic of his career, came across as strikingly authentic (“it felt real, because it was real’,” offered a proud Eric Bischoff upon reflection years later). On commentary, Schiavone - who most inspiredly suggested that Hogan had planned to double-cross WCW all along, since his debut in 1994 no less - added to the realism with some mournful final comments: “We have seen the end of Hulkamania,” he grieved. “Hulk Hogan, you can go to hell! We’re outta here. Straight to hell.” ---- To the layman, there appeared an obvious explanation for the feverous crowd response that accompanied Hogan’s turn. Clearly, the element of surprise - one of the key elements of Nitro’s success - had been exploited to a masterful degree (“nobody on earth thought that the third man was going to be Hulk Hogan,” highlights Nash). To Kevin Sullivan, however, there were several layers of story at play. “People thought that it was an invasion from the WWF,” he begins, implying that the success of the angle could be correlated to its realism. “They really bought into it, and when Hogan turned heel...they were sure of it. “So while Hogan gets the credit for the reaction, it was [Nash and Hall] who set the whole thing up. Those guys built the foundation of heat, and when Hogan came down, it just blew up.” “We were red hot coming off WWF television,” agrees Nash, “and then you had the biggest turn in the world on top of that. The biggest babyface of all-time finally turned heel!” To the ever-meticulous Sullivan, always a keen observer of the nuances present in a wrestling angle, an often overlooked element was also noteworthy. “He did it to Randy [Savage],” the booker emphasizes, speaking of Hogan’s betrayal. “People knew there was real-life heat there. That helped out too, but everyone played an intricate part. “Lightning...you can’t catch it in a bottle but one time.” The above is an excerpt from the book, NITRO: The Incredible Rise and Inevitable Collapse of Ted Turner's WCW. Amazon USA: Amazon UK: Amazon Canada: Amazon Australia: 17+ Hour Audiobook Available at Audible and Apple Books Audible USA: Audible UK: Audible Canada: Audible Australia: Apple Books: Ultimate NITRO Bundle: Deep Cuts - Wrestling Stories in 60 Seconds! David Penzer AdFreeShows.com 83 Weeks with Eric Bischoff On This Day in WWE Allan Conrad the Mortgage Guy IandrewDiceClay WCW Archive Because WCW WCW4Life ᴀʀᴅᴀ Öᴄᴀʟ 90s WWE Secrets of WCW Nitro #WCW #nWo #HulkHogan #BashattheBeach #HeelTurn #Wrestling #WrestlingBooks #OTD #WWE #WorldChampionshipWrestling #Nitro

WCWNitroBook

53,506 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce

Why Opus 4.6 Is The Final Boss Of Algorithmic Trading (Full Bot Build) the day of the human trader is officially over and most people are still staring at charts like it is 1995. wall street is terrified because the barrier to entry just got deleted by a piece of software that can outthink a stanford graduate in seconds. they want you to believe that you need a multi million dollar education to compete with the big banks. they want you to stay stuck in the cycle of emotional trading and leverage because that is how they pay for their hamptons houses. but there is a specific reason why every retail trader is about to become obsolete unless they pivot right now. i am going to show you exactly why your current strategy is a mathematical death trap and how a single jump in technology just changed the game forever every time you sit down at your computer to draw lines on a chart you are entering a gunfight with a toothpick. the institutions have been using high frequency algorithms for decades while you are trying to guess which way the candle is going to move based on a feeling in your gut. it is not a fair fight and it was never intended to be. last year we were looking at models that could barely handle basic logic but now the intelligence has scaled to a point where the machines are finding edges we did not even know existed. there is a ghost in the machine that is pulling out strategies with sharp ratios so high they look like typos. if you do not understand how to harness this power you are essentially donating your capital to the people who already have too much of it i spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on developers because i was too scared to learn how to code myself. i thought that being the idea guy was enough and that i could just hire people from upwork to build my dreams. i got rinsed for years paying for apps and bots that did not work because i did not have my hands on the wheel. it took losing a massive amount of money through liquidations and over trading to realize that nobody was coming to save me. i had to become the person who could build the systems or i was going to be another statistic in the graveyard of traders who thought they were smarter than the math. once i finally sat down and forced myself to understand the syntax everything shifted and the world became a giant playground of data the truth is that code is the great equalizer because it does not care where you came from or what school you went to. i got held back in seventh grade and my teacher told me i would not make it around here. that kind of talk is meant to keep you in your place but the computer does not have a bias. if you can write the logic the system will execute it exactly as told regardless of your background. we are living in a time where a kid in a basement can build a system that rivals a hedge fund because the big tech companies are subsidizing our intelligence. they are spending hundreds of billions of dollars on infrastructure and we are the ones who get to reap the rewards of their competition most people fail in this game because they fall in love with a single idea and refuse to let it go even when it is burning their account to the ground. they spend months or years trying to make one indicator work when the data clearly shows it is trash. you have to drop the ego and realize that your intuition is probably your biggest liability. the secret to winning is iterating to success by testing a hundred ideas until you find the one that actually sticks. i call it the rbi system which stands for research backtest and implement. if you skip any of these steps you are just gambling with extra steps and the house always wins in the end research is where most traders get lazy because they just want a magic bot that prints money while they sleep. they go to youtube and find some guy promising a ninety percent win rate with a rsi crossover. that is not research that is falling for marketing fluff designed to sell you a dream. real research happens when you dive into white papers and study what the quants are actually doing on wall street. you look for market inefficiencies like liquidation clusters and cross exchange discrepancies that are hidden in plain sight. by the time you finish this process you should have a list of ideas that are grounded in reality instead of wishful thinking backtesting is the filter that saves you from losing your life savings on a bad hunch. most people use tools that repaint or give them false confidence because the data is not being handled correctly. if you are using a basic charting platform to see if your strategy works you are likely seeing a version of history that does not exist. you need to use raw python libraries like backtesting py to see the cold hard truth of how your logic would have performed. when you see a drawdown of thirty percent on paper you realize that using ten times leverage would have deleted your account five times over. the math does not lie and it is the only thing that can protect you from your own greed the most dangerous drug in the world is leverage because it makes you feel like a genius right before it makes you a pauper. i have watched two billion dollars get liquidated in a single day because people thought they could predict the bottom with fifty times leverage. the exchanges can see exactly where your liquidation price is and they have every incentive to push the price there to hunt your liquidity. you are playing in a casino where the house can see your cards and they are actively trying to take them from you. the only way to win is to stop playing their game and start using limit orders to save on the fees that are slowly bleeding you dry it is funny how much money people will spend on food and entertainment but they will hesitate to invest in their own education. they will spend a thousand dollars on a weekend out but will not put that same money into learning a skill that could provide for them for the rest of their lives. money is just a tool of exchange and it always replenishes if you are providing value to the world. if you spend your capital on knowledge you are buying back your time and your freedom. i decided to live my life on youtube and build in public because i wanted to show people that a regular guy could do this. now i have fully automated systems trading for me while i sleep and i never have to worry about getting licked by a sudden market move again chasing the greats like jim simons is not about the money it is about the mastery of the system. he ran up a net worth of over thirty billion dollars by doing exactly what we are talking about here. he did not stare at charts all day and hope for the best he built models that exploited the mathematical laws of the market. he was a scientist first and a trader second and that is the mindset you need to adopt. if you are not approaching this quantitatively you are just a gambler who happens to be sitting at a computer. the goal is to become a quant researcher who happens to have robots executing their findings the transition from hand trader to automated builder is the most liberating thing you can do for your mental health. you go from waking up in a cold sweat checking your phone to waking up and checking your logs to see how the system performed. even if the day was red you have data that tells you why and you can use that to make the system better tomorrow. it is a process of constant improvement and refinement that never really ends. you are building a legacy of code that will continue to work for you as long as the electricity is running. i am not afraid to die on a treadmill because i know that i will outwork anyone who is just looking for a shortcut if you are still on the fence about whether or not you can do this just remember that i was exactly where you are. i was losing money and feeling like the market was rigged against me because it actually was. i had to decide that i was going to change my environment and take control of my own destiny. you have the same opportunity right now to pivot and start building your own automated future. the models are getting better every single day and the barrier to entry is lower than it has ever been in human history. you just have to decide to lock in and do the work for a thousand days until you become undeniable there is no better feeling than finding a strategy that has a sharp ratio over ten and knowing that you built it with your own two hands. it is a moment of pure clarity where you realize that you are no longer a victim of the market. you are the architect of your own financial reality and the possibilities are literally endless. i am going to keep sharing everything i find because i believe that we can take on wall street together. as long as i am breathing i will be stepping on the gas and pushing the boundaries of what is possible with code. welcome to the family and let's get after it because the machines are already running and they are not waiting for anyone

Moon Dev

46,677 görüntüleme • 8 ay önce

On March 15th, 2021, an anonymous Twitter user asked Harvard Medical professor Martin Kulldorff a question. “Do you think younger age groups and or people who have already had the virus need to be vaccinated?” Who is Martin Kulldorff? He’s a Harvard Medical School professor for 21 years, a well-known Swedish biostatistician who developed widely used software for disease mapping, the co-author of the Great Barrington Declaration on how to deal with the COVID pandemic, and an advisor to the world’s leading health organizations. What he said was that “Thinking that everyone must be vaccinated is as scientifically flawed as thinking that nobody should get COVID. Vaccines are important for older high-risk people and their caretakers. Those with prior natural infection do not need it, nor do children.” Natural immunity. Is it a myth — a “conspiracy theory” — that once you have been sick from a virus, then you won’t get sick, or as sick, again? In fact, we’ve known for 2,500 years that natural immunity is real. “The same man was never attacked twice, never at least fatally,” wrote Thucydides, describing the plague of Athens. He observed that recovered individuals could safely nurse the sick without falling ill themselves. And yet Twitter censored Martin Kulldorff’s tweet. “Learn why health officials recommend a vaccine,” read a warning that Twitter employees put on it. For most people, the Tweet cannot be replied to, shared or liked. In other words, Twitter had decided that this professor at Harvard Medical School was wrong, and that natural immunity wasn’t really something that could protect you from COVID. Jay Bhattacharya, who’s currently our Director of the National Institutes of Health, and thus one of the highest-ranking public health officials in the world, was a Stanford epidemiologist before that. Twitter put him on a “Trends Blacklist.” Not long before we discovered this, we were told that shadow-banning was a conspiracy theory, because Twitter had said it didn’t shadow-ban. Now the European Commission is trying to censor the entire global internet. They want to put a 140 million Euro fine on X. They want to end anonymity, which was what allowed that question of Kulldorff to be asked. They want to use a “Democracy Shield” program to shield the Commission from democracy. And the Commission wants to impose “chat control” so they can read your private messages. It just gets worse and worse. Unsubstantiated and likely false claims of Russian government election interference through TikTok and social media were made in Romania and in the Czech Republic. Truth is not something that anybody holds as a possession and rather emerges through dialogue. We’ve known that since Plato and Socrates. We need free speech for science, public health, and national security. It’s essential to journalism, democracy, and human freedom. Free speech enabled civilization; censorship threatens it. This is the only political cause that I would die for. And yet there is currently an active coordination between Stanford, Brazil, Australia, and others to impose what I think we can call, without exaggeration, global totalitarianism. They’re pushing for digital identification that will end anonymity online. Why is that? Why are these guys behaving in this way? When Elon Musk took over Twitter on October 28th, 2022, unprecedented insight into multiple secret government mass censorship efforts emerged from this exploration. We had unlimited access to Twitter files. They revealed that the mainstream news reporters, who don’t deserve the name, were demanding censorship. No true journalist demands censorship of his fellow journalists. What emerged from this was an understanding of something we call the “Censorship Industrial Complex,” which directly grew out of the military industrial complex and was run by active or former intelligence community officials who often operate under that banner. It led to multiple congressional investigations and hearings, and it spread across every social media platform. So we now know the censorship that occurred, not just at Twitter, but at YouTube, at Facebook, TikTok, and other platforms. What is the Censorship Industrial Complex? The model isn’t that complicated to understand. The government chooses people whom they call “researchers” to serve as censors. These are government-funded individuals who often come from the intelligence community and foreign policy establishment. They work at non-governmental organizations funded by governments or at universities funded by governments. They conduct “fact checks” to serve as “trusted flaggers.” These “trusted flaggers” demand censorship by social media platforms. It’s all done in secret. They’re looking to censor narratives. This is essential because, as decades of good cognitive science have shown, people understand and retain information through storytelling. We think in terms of stories, not bullet points. And so they were out to censor whole narratives. From the Stanford censorship project on COVID, the “Virality Project,” they said they wanted to censor “true stories” of vaccine side effects. Why? Because it might “fuel hesitancy.” In other words, they want to control your behavior. They don’t want you to receive true information that might lead you to not get the vaccine. If that isn’t totalitarianism straight out of 1984, I don’t know what it. These people were on the verge of passing legislation in the United States that would’ve authorized the National Science Foundation to choose these “researcher” censors. I’m presenting slides to Europeans and the world for situational awareness into what totalitarian politicians and bureaucrats have planned because this is still going strong. Stanford helped the US government censor COVID dissidents, and then they lied about it. You might be detecting a pattern. They’re really not interested in censoring “misinformation.’ They’re very interested in censoring true information. The censors flagged an Israeli preprint which came out in December, 2020 and found, lo and behold, that natural immunity is a real thing. In fact, it’s more protective than the vaccine. But the censors flagged somebody’s Google Drive. “See the following Google Drive links being used to compile testimonies about vaccine shedding, Covid videos, showing side effects and whatnot.” Google then removed that content from that person’s Google Drive. You don’t control your Google Drive. Contrary to Stanford’s claim that the project did not ask social media platforms to remove any content, they privately said they did. And we know that many hundreds of thousands of tweets and Facebook posts were removed, even though they were a hundred percent accurate. In fact, in 2021, Stanford’s “Virality Project” flagged accurate claims that the World Health Organization did not recommend vaccinating children. The people who spread the misinformation are the people demanding the censorship. They claimed Covid couldn’t have come from a lab, that the Covid vaccine prevented infection, and that natural immunity didn’t exist. The only solution to hate speech and misinformation is free speech. If you censor false information, how would anybody get the true information? The whole point is the debate. They lied when they said false information travels faster than true information. It’s a completely bogus study and involved six seconds of content on Twitter. Who are these people? As of 2020, there were so many former FBI employees at Twitter that they called them “Bu alumni.” They created their own private Slack channel and a crib sheet to onboard new FBI arrivals. Intriguingly, we discovered that the general counsel of the FBI — arguably the second most powerful person of the FBI, or maybe the first, if you think, consider that what their actual job is to decide what the FBI can and can’t do — resigned from FBI in early 2020 and went to Twitter to take the deputy general counsel role. Isn’t that interesting? Somebody in one of the most powerful legal positions in the world would take a junior legal role at a social media company. Why would that be? This email popped up when we were going through Twitter files and it really jumped out at us. It’s from the director of policy at Twitter. “We have seen a sustained if uncoordinated” — supposedly — “effort by the intelligence community to push us to share more information and change our API policies. They’re probing and pushing everywhere they can.” The Hunter Biden laptop censorship occurred later that year. The FBI and the intelligence community discredited accurate, factual information about Hunter Biden’s foreign business dealings both before and after the New York Post revealed the contents of his laptop on October 14th, 2020. How could the FBI spread false information about something that nobody knew about? Because the FBI had Hunter Biden’s laptop, which showed his family’s massive influence peddling scheme. It consisted of accepting tens of millions of dollars, including from the Chinese government. The FBI had been sitting on that laptop since December of 2019. They had been given it by the computer repair store owner, who had been given the laptop by Hunter Biden, likely because he dropped it in his bathtub or in the pool, when he was on one of his many crack and alcohol benders. The government strategy is always the same: spread disinformation first, then demand censorship of accurate information on the basis of it . “The FBI came to us in the summer of 2020,” Mark Zuckerberg told Joe Rogan two years later, “and they were like, ‘Hey, you should be on the alert. We thought that there was a lot of Russian propaganda in 2016. There’s about to be some kind of dump.’” In the summer of 2020, the New York Post had not published the story about the Hunter Biden laptop. It would only come out in October. We see something very interesting show up in the Twitter files: the Aspen Institute, an intermediary between the intelligence community and the public. It’s known as a Davos-style gab fest in the United States. It’s also the place where intelligence community operations are run. They hosted a workshop to train reporters and all of the social media’s top censorship officials, known as “trust and safety officials,” how to deal with a story they would hear in the future relating to Hunter Biden and Barisma. A few months earlier, the Stanford Cyber Policy Center had published a report attacking what we in the United States call the Pentagon Papers Principle. The Pentagon Papers Principle says that if a government official gives me, a journalist, a bunch of Pentagon documents showing that we’re losing the war in Vietnam, I, as a journalist, can publish them, and not risk prison. That was decided in a famous Supreme Court case in 1971. Stanford argued that, really, we should get rid of that principle, which may be the most important investigative journalism principle in the United States, and said, “You should cover the person who leaked the materials, not the leaked emails.” In other words, you should cover and expose the whistleblower. The person who exposed the Pentagon Papers is the real bad guy, not the DOD, CIA, and presidents who had lied to us for over a decade. Stanford was training the journalists and the social media trust and safety officers in how to cover a story that had not yet come out. This is known as “pre-bunking,” and it’s also part of the European Union strategy to shield themselves from democracy. When the Hunter Biden story appeared October 22nd, Twitter’s trust and safety censorship official said it didn’t violate its terms of service. There’s nothing illegal about any of this. The Supreme Court has made it very clear that you’re allowed to report on information that’s been leaked to you. At that moment, the former FBI general counsel, Jim Baker, argued vigorously that Twitter really needed to censor it. Baker won and they censored the story. It’s not that we didn’t hear about the Hunter Biden laptop story when it came out. I certainly did. But we had the impression that there was something wrong with it, that it was not really the whole story. And so many of us dismissed it. What they had done was a psyop on this major story. They had changed our perception of the story. And it worked. It worked on me, it worked on everybody I knew. What is the role of the intelligence community of social media companies? The former CIA people are the head of elections at Meta, and Google’s head of trust and safety. Former and current CIA officers have a history of spreading misinformation and promoting the Russiagate conspiracy theory. We now know that between 2018 and 2023, there were 36 people from the CIA 68 from the FBI 44, from the National Security Administration and 68 from the Department of Homeland Security who had moved to work at the social media platforms. This is not unique to the United States. My colleague Cecilia Jilková, the daughter of famous Czech dissidents, discovered that European Union officials claimed, days before the European elections in 2024, that a “pro-Kremlin website” was spreading propaganda and were paying off European politicians. That was the headline in Politico. We wrote to them and asked, “Where’s the evidence of this? Just go ahead and share the evidence to support your accusation days before the European parliamentary elections.” Nobody was arrested. They never produced the evidence. The former Czech president, Václav Klaus, who was accused of this, said, “We don’t even know what the ‘Voice of Europe’ is.” Another Czech politician said, “How could I have known it would be a security threat? At the time I gave the interview, they weren’t on any list.” Another said, “If they’re such a big threat, why did the European Parliament let the Voice of Europe’s journalists inside?” Nobody responded. Nobody talked to us. This was a disinformation campaign carried by Politico, which, in my view, is a suspect publication. In the spring of 2022, Barack Obama went to Stanford to give a speech at the Stanford Cyber Policy Center run by Michael McFaul, his former ambassador to Russia. Obama said misinformation harms democracy and urged support for legislation in Congress that would empower government-appointed researchers to serve as “trusted flaggers.” Six days later, the Department of Homeland Security rolled out their Disinformation Governance Board. What a coincidence that they got Obama to frame the issue for them. Facebook in 2021 censored accurate vaccine information so the White House would help it to get data from Europe. In addition to removing vaccine misinformation, wrote Facebook to the White House, we have been focused on reducing the virality of content discouraging vaccines that does not contain actionable misinformation. White House said jump, and Facebook said how high? Why did they do it? Why would they voluntarily censor? This also emerged from the Facebook files. Nick Clegg on the left wrote an email to his colleagues. He said, “My sense is that given we’ve got bigger fish, we have to fry with the administration, e.g., data flows, it doesn’t seem like a great place for us to be.” Data flows. What’s he talking about? He’s talking about billions of dollars worth of business that he has to, that they would have to pay the European Commission for if they didn’t have the support from the Biden administration to lean on the European Commission. In other words, this was a shakedown by the White House of Facebook and it worked in France, the country of Liberté. Turns out it has a special role.... Please subscribe now to support Public's defense of free speech, watch the full video, and read the rest of the article!

Michael Shellenberger

174,749 görüntüleme • 8 ay önce

A shark doesn't care that you're standing on the sand. That's the first thing nobody tells you about the shoreline at night. You think the beach is your territory. It's not. It's a border. And after dark, the other side of that border wakes up. Read this slowly. Then watch the video at the bottom. I promise it hits differently once you know what you're actually looking at. Let's start with a number that should not be possible. 450,000,000. That's roughly how many years sharks have been on this planet. Trees showed up later. The dinosaurs showed up later. The Atlantic Ocean, in its current shape, showed up later. Sharks have lived through FIVE mass extinctions, including the one that erased 90% of everything alive, and they came out the other side and kept hunting. You are not dealing with an animal. You are dealing with a survivor that has beaten every single disaster the planet ever threw at it. And tonight, someone decided to pick a fight with one. From the sand. With a rod. Keep reading. --- THE MACHINE UNDER THE WATER Forget the movie version. The real shark is scarier because it's more engineered than any movie ever bothered to show. Start with the nose. Around the snout of a shark sit thousands of tiny jelly-filled pores called the ampullae of Lorenzini. They detect electrical fields. Not "sense vibes." Detect electricity. The faint pulse of a heartbeat. The twitch of a muscle in a fish buried in sand. Researchers estimate the sensitivity is down at a few billionths of a volt per centimeter. Read that again. A shark can feel the electrical whisper of a living thing that is hiding, silent, completely still, in the dark. Then there's the smell. The commonly told version is that a shark can pick up a single drop of blood in an Olympic-sized pool. That's a simplification, but the real point stands: about a third of the shark's entire brain is dedicated to processing scent. It doesn't smell like you smell. It smells directionally. Each nostril reports separately, so it can tell which side the smell is coming from and turn toward it like a missile locking on. Add the eyes. Many sharks have a reflective layer behind the retina, the same trick a cat uses, so that every scrap of light gets a second pass through the eye. Night is not darkness for them. Night is the good part of the day. Add the lateral line, a row of sensors running down the body that reads pressure changes in the water. A struggling fish sends out a signature. A shark reads it from far away like a text message that says "dinner, this way." Now stack all of that together, and picture what's swimming in the surf line while people are laughing on the sand thirty feet away. That's not a fish. That's a surveillance system with teeth. --- THE TEETH THAT NEVER RUN OUT Let's talk about the mouth, because the mouth is where the story gets ugly. A shark doesn't have one set of teeth. It has a conveyor belt. Rows and rows of teeth sit behind the front line, folded down like a deck of cards waiting to be dealt. When a tooth in front snaps off, the next one rotates forward to take its place. Some species can go through tens of thousands of teeth in a lifetime. Some replace a tooth in days. Nobody has ever managed to disarm a shark. Break its weapon and it grows another one before you can blink. And the bite? Depending on the species, a large shark can clamp down with enough force to punch through fish bone, turtle shell and sometimes metal hooks like they're wet cardboard. Not because it's angry. Because it's built that way. There is no malice in it. That's what makes it so unsettling. It doesn't hate you. It doesn't think about you at all. It's just a mouth with a mission. --- WHY THE SHORELINE AT NIGHT IS THE MOST DANGEROUS PLACE IN THE OCEAN Here's what surprised me when I started reading about this. Sharks come close to shore on purpose. Not by accident. Not because they got lost. The shallows are a buffet. Baitfish get pushed into the surf line by predators from below and the current from above. Rays bury themselves in the sand. Crabs. Mullet. Everything smaller than the shark is packed into a narrow strip of shallow water with nowhere to run. At night, the smaller fish come in closer because they feel safer in the dark. The sharks know that. So they come in behind them. Which means the exact same strip of water that feels safe to you, ankle deep, knee deep, harmless, is the busiest hunting corridor on the coast the moment the sun goes down. Every night. For millions of years. Long before there was a beach town, a parking lot, or a phone in your hand. And then a group of people decides to stand right in the middle of it, in the dark, with nothing but a headlamp. Not a boat. Not a cage. Not a deck with a railing. Sand. --- THE FIGHT NO ONE PLANS FOR Here's the thing about hooking something big from land. On a boat, you have leverage. You have a deck. You have engines. You can chase the fish, and if it runs, you follow it. On the shore, you have none of that. You have your legs. Your back. A rod that suddenly feels like it's tied to a truck. And the animal on the other end has an entire ocean to pull against. The first thing that happens is the silence. Nobody talks. You hear the reel scream, that high metallic whine of line ripping off the spool faster than your hands can process, and everyone standing around you suddenly forgets how to breathe. Then the rod bends. Not a little. Not the polite bend you see on YouTube. The kind where the tip points at the water and the whole thing looks like it's about to fold in half. And this is where the internal math starts. How much line is left? How long can this hold? Who's going to grab the rod if it's ripped out of your hands? What happens if this thing decides to run parallel to the beach and drag you into the surf? Every second is a negotiation with an animal that outweighs you, outswims you, and doesn't get tired the way you do. Some sharks fight for an hour. Some fight for ten minutes and just as suddenly go slack, and that's worse, because then you don't know if it's giving up or turning around. There's a rule among people who do this: you don't fight the shark. You manage the moment. You let it run, you take back what it gives you, and you never, ever get greedy. Get greedy and something breaks. A line. A hook. A wrist. A decision. --- THE MOMENT IT COMES OUT OF THE DARK This is the part I want you to sit with. Imagine you've been pulling for a long time. Your forearms are shaking. The line is coming in slowly, inch by inch, and the water in front of you is black. Not dark. Black. You can't see three feet down. And then the light from a headlamp catches something. A shape. A darker shape inside the dark water. It's bigger than you thought it would be. It's always bigger than you thought. There's a moment, a single, frozen, electric second, where every person on that beach understands that this is real. That the thing everyone was joking about ten minutes ago is now a few feet away, alive, angry, and looking directly at them with an eye that has no expression at all. And the water erupts. You know that feeling when you're on a rollercoaster and the car tips over the top and you realize it's too late to get off? It's that. Multiplied. With no seatbelt. --- THE ANIMAL IS NOT THE MONSTER YOU THINK IT IS Now, I need to be honest with you, because the internet loves to lie about sharks in both directions. Sharks are not mindless killing machines. That's the myth. Movies invented it, and it cost them decades of lives. The real numbers are the opposite of what you'd expect. Globally, sharks are responsible for around five to ten human deaths in a typical year. Meanwhile humans kill somewhere on the order of seventy to a hundred million sharks a year. Read that again. Seventy to a hundred million. You are far more likely to be killed by a vending machine, a falling coconut, or your own bathtub than by a shark. So why does this animal make our stomachs drop? Because it's the only creature left on Earth that still reminds us we're food. That we're not at the top. That the second we leave the land and step into their world, the rules change, and the rules aren't ours. That's the real reason people are drawn to this. It's not cruelty. It's not bragging. It's the ancient, gut-level need to stand at the edge of something bigger than you and see what it feels like. It's terrifying. It's humbling. And weirdly, it makes you feel more alive than almost anything else. --- WHAT HAPPENS TO YOUR BODY IN THE FIRST TEN SECONDS There's a reason people who've stood next to a big predator describe the same thing. Time stops behaving. Adrenaline floods your system. Your pupils open wider. Your heart rate spikes before your brain has finished processing what it saw. Blood pulls from your fingers and toes and floods your large muscles. Your hearing narrows. Fine motor skills, the kind you need to tie a knot or unhook a swivel, get worse in the exact moment you need them most. Psychologists call it the fight-or-flight response. Anyone who's actually been there calls it something else: the moment you find out who you are. Because in that window, there are only three kinds of people. The ones who freeze. The ones who panic. And the ones who get quiet, get precise, and start working. Watch the people around the edges of this scene. Watch who moves toward the animal, who moves away, and who moves with purpose. That difference is the entire story. That's the part you can't fake and can't practice in a gym. --- THE PART OF THE ANIMAL YOU'LL NEVER FORGET Everyone remembers the teeth. Nobody expects the skin. Run your hand along a shark from head to tail and it feels smooth, like silk. Run it back the other way and it feels like sandpaper. That's because the skin is covered in microscopic, tooth-shaped scales called dermal denticles. They're the same basic material as its teeth. They point backward and they reduce drag so well that engineers have studied them to design swimsuits, ship hulls and aircraft coatings. The animal isn't just built to bite. It's built to be silent. Water slides over that skin with almost no turbulence, which means it can come at you without a single ripple announcing it. Then there's the eye. Roll a shark onto its back, or hold certain species in the right way, and something strange happens. Some sharks enter a state called tonic immobility. Muscles relax, breathing slows, and the animal goes still and limp like it's asleep. Scientists still argue about exactly why it works. The state usually wears off within a few minutes, and when it does, the animal snaps back into a full-power predator in an instant. Which is exactly why the people who are truly experienced around sharks are the most respectful of them. The rookies are the ones who relax. --- THE THING ABOUT FLORIDA-STYLE NIGHTS If you've never stood on a warm beach at night, here's what you're missing. The air is thick. The surf hisses. Somewhere down the shoreline a light blinks on a channel marker and disappears. The sand still holds the heat of the day, but the water is a different world entirely. It's the temperature of a bath and it hides everything. Warm coastal water is a nursery. Young sharks live in the shallows because the bigger predators can't follow them in as easily. Baitfish stack up. Rays glide along the sandbar. Some of the most productive shark habitat on the planet is a few steps from a cheap motel and a taco stand. That's what makes it so strange. There's this sharp, almost absurd contrast between the postcard version of the beach and the version that actually exists at 11 p.m. Same coast. Same water. Completely different animal. --- THE RULES THE SMART ONES FOLLOW You'll notice something if you ever spend time around people who catch large sharks from shore and then let them go. They are almost obsessive about the rules. Not because someone is watching. Because they've seen what happens when you cut corners. Keep the animal in the water as much as you possibly can. A big shark's body isn't built to support its own weight out of the water. Organs that float in the sea get crushed by gravity on land. Every second counts. Use gear that lets you end the fight fast. A drawn-out battle exhausts the animal and can harm it long after it swims away. Heavy tackle isn't cruelty. It's mercy. Cut the line if you have to. Any experienced angler will tell you the same thing: a lost hook is cheaper than a lost animal, or a lost finger. Know your local regulations. Rules about which species you can target, how you can handle them and what gear you have to use vary from place to place and change over time. What's fine in one spot can be illegal or protected in another. And most importantly, never go alone. Not with this. Never. This is the part that doesn't go viral. The teamwork. The quiet checks. The person who's watching the water and never touches the rod. The one who's calling out the waves. The scary part of the story gets the clicks. The careful part is what keeps everyone alive. --- A SHARK IS NOT A SINGLE ANIMAL One of the biggest mistakes people make is talking about "the shark" as if it's one thing. There are more than 500 known species. Some are the size of your hand. Some are longer than a bus. Some glow in the dark. Some live in rivers. Some have heads shaped like hammers, and some have snouts like saws. One kind is the biggest fish in the ocean and eats nothing but plankton. Another can live for hundreds of years, the Greenland shark, which may be the longest-lived vertebrate on Earth. And some of the ones that hang around warm coastal shallows are strong, thick-bodied, powerful predators built for ambush in murky water and surf. So when someone says "I caught a shark," the real question is: which one? How big? Where? What was it doing there? What did it want? Every one of those answers changes the story. And it's why you can watch two videos of "a shark on a beach" and feel two completely different things. --- THE BULL SHARK PROBLEM Let me tell you about the animal that makes marine biologists nervous. Bull sharks are one of the few sharks that can live in both salt water and fresh water. They have a specialized system that lets their bodies regulate salt, so they can swim far up rivers. Bull sharks have been documented in rivers thousands of miles from the sea, including the Amazon and the Mississippi. They are stocky. They are aggressive. They live in the murkiest, shallowest, most human-crowded water there is, because that's where the food is. You can run through the list of everything sharks are and still not be ready for one that shows up in a canal behind a suburban house. That's part of why the surf line feels different at night. You never know exactly what you've got. You only know you've got something. --- WHY WE CAN'T LOOK AWAY Here's a question worth asking. Why do millions of people watch videos like this? It's not just the danger. It's not just the adrenaline. If it were, we'd watch car crashes and nothing else. It's something quieter than that. It's that a shark reminds us that the world is still wild. That the ocean is still bigger than us. That there are still places we don't control and animals we don't fully understand. We live in a world where everything is mapped, tracked and delivered to our door. Then, for twenty seconds, a screen shows us something that doesn't care about any of that. Something ancient, physical, unfiltered. And we lean in. Every time. It hits the oldest part of your brain, the part that kept your ancestors alive on the edge of a river. The part that still knows what to do when something big moves in the dark. Your phone is in your hand. But your instincts are standing knee-deep in that water. --- THE COUNTDOWN NO ONE CALLS OUT I want to describe the exact moment before it happens, without telling you what happens. There's a beat of quiet. The kind you feel more than hear. The water goes flat for a second, as if the whole ocean is inhaling. Everyone knows something is about to change. Nobody knows what. Somebody laughs, but it comes out wrong. Somebody says a word, half a prayer and half a curse. Somebody steps back without realizing they stepped back. And the ones who stay put? They understand something the rest of us only learn when we're standing there. The moment before is always bigger than the moment itself. --- THE NUMBERS THAT SHOULD HUMBLE YOU Let's zoom out for a second, because the scale of this animal is hard to hold in your head. A great white can smell and track prey across huge distances. Some sharks cross entire oceans, migrating thousands of miles, and return to the same feeding grounds year after year with a precision we still can't fully explain. Some species have to keep moving or they suffocate, pushing water over their gills for every breath of their lives. Imagine an animal that has never once stopped swimming since the day it was born. A shark's liver can make up a huge portion of its body weight and works like a built-in float, because unlike most fish, sharks have no swim bladder. Their skeleton isn't bone at all. It's cartilage, the same flexible material in your ears and nose, light, strong and fast to heal. Some sharks give birth to live young. Some lay egg cases, the so-called mermaid's purses that wash up on beaches. Some hatch and fend for themselves from minute one, with no parents, no protection, no instructions. Every single trait you'd expect from a creature that has been perfecting the same design for hundreds of millions of years. Now put a hook in its mouth and drag it toward a group of people in flip-flops. That's the situation. That's the whole situation. --- THE THREE SECOND RULE Ask anyone who has worked with big predators and they'll tell you the same thing: the danger is never where you're looking. It's not the mouth. Everyone watches the mouth. It's the tail, a powerful, muscular paddle that can throw a grown adult off his feet without effort. It's the water itself, churning and thick and impossible to read, hiding footing, hiding line, hiding hooks. It's the crowd, because a group of excited people is the most unpredictable variable on any beach. Everyone wants a better angle. Everyone wants to be closer. Everyone thinks they're the exception. It's the ground. Wet sand gives way. A retreating wave takes your balance the moment you put your weight on it. And it's time. Every second the animal is out of its element is a second it's under stress. Every second the people around it are excited is a second closer to a mistake. That's why the experienced ones move fast and speak little. They know the countdown is running. --- THE OLDEST CONVERSATION ON EARTH There's a reason humans have always been fascinated by this. Every coastal culture in history has stories about sharks. Islanders who saw them as ancestors and guardians. Sailors who feared them as omens. Fishermen who measured their careers by the size of what they'd hooked, or the size of what got away. That instinct hasn't gone anywhere. It's just moved from campfires to phone screens. We still need that story. The one where ordinary people, in ordinary clothes, on an ordinary night, walk straight up to the edge of something enormous and come back with a memory they'll be telling until they're old. That's not about the fish. That's about the feeling. The feeling of being small. And doing it anyway. --- WHAT THE SHARK KNOWS THAT YOU DON'T Let me end the science with something strange. Sharks are not stupid. For a long time people assumed they were pure instinct, but studies over the last few decades tell a different story. Sharks can learn. They can remember. They can recognize patterns, respond to training and, in some species, show what looks a lot like curiosity. Individual sharks appear to behave differently from one another. Some are bold. Some are shy. Some investigate everything. Some avoid new objects entirely. Personalities, in an animal we've been calling a "mindless killer" for a hundred years. Which means something a little uncomfortable. When that animal rolls in the surf and looks at you, it isn't seeing a blur. It's assessing. Reading you. Deciding. And the thing is, it's usually deciding that you are not worth the trouble. That's the great secret of sharks. Almost every encounter that ever happens ends with the animal simply choosing to leave. --- WHY THIS VIDEO IS DIFFERENT I've watched a lot of shark footage. Cage dives. Drone shots. Documentaries with orchestral scores and a narrator whispering like a librarian. This is not that. There's no cage. No boat. No narrator. No safety net and no second take. What you get is raw and shaky and human. A phone held by someone who is clearly not thinking about framing. Voices overlapping. Laughter that's half nerves. Light swinging across black water. The kind of footage that could never be staged because nobody could plan it. And that's the point. The reason it works isn't the animal. It's the people. Their faces. Their reactions. The way a normal night at the edge of the sea tips, without any warning, into something none of them will ever forget. You can feel it through the screen. You can feel the salt and the adrenaline and the disbelief. It's twenty-four seconds long. You'll watch it three times. --- THE QUESTIONS YOU'LL ASK YOURSELF I can already tell you what's going to happen when you press play. First, you'll try to figure out what you're looking at. Where it's happening. How big. How close. Then you'll notice the details. The light. The sand. The water. The expressions. The moment where things change. Then you'll ask yourself the question everyone asks: Would I have stayed? Would you have held your ground? Or backed away? Would you have reached in? Would you have stayed quiet? Would you have laughed? Would you have run? Be honest. Most people answer that question wrong the first time. That's what makes it addictive. It's not just a video. It's a mirror. --- THINGS TO WATCH FOR Don't just watch the animal. Watch everything else. Watch how the group behaves. There's a rhythm to it, a kind of unspoken teamwork that only appears when people trust each other completely. Watch the light. A single headlamp cutting through the dark creates a small bright world where everything outside feels enormous. Watch the water. It never sits still, and neither does anyone standing in it. Watch the faces. Every emotion a human can feel shows up in the span of a few seconds. Fear. Joy. Awe. Disbelief. And watch the end. Because the ending is the part people keep replaying. I won't say more. I don't want to spoil it. --- A SMALL WARNING If you're thinking about trying anything like this yourself, please hear me. This is not a hobby you improvise. Sharks are wild animals, and even the most experienced people treat every encounter as unpredictable. Local laws matter. Species protections matter. Proper gear, proper handling and proper respect for the animal matter, because getting any one of them wrong can hurt you, the people with you, or a creature that deserves better. Admire it from a screen if you're not trained. Learn from the people who are. Ask questions, read the rules where you live, and remember that the ocean doesn't give second chances. The best stories come from people who do it right. --- ONE MORE THING BEFORE YOU PRESS PLAY Most people scroll past videos like this in two seconds. They see the dark, they see the water, and their thumb keeps moving. Don't be most people. Give it the full twenty-four seconds. Let your eyes adjust the way theirs had to. Let the noise build. Let the strange, electric tension climb the way it climbs when you know something is about to break the surface. Because the best moments online aren't the loud ones. They're the ones where you realize, halfway through, that you've stopped scrolling. --- THE LAST THING Here's what I keep coming back to. Somewhere tonight, on some stretch of coast, the water is dark and warm and moving. And beneath the surface, an animal older than trees is doing exactly what its ancestors did four hundred million years ago. It doesn't know about the internet. It doesn't know about likes or views or followers. It only knows the water, the dark and the hunt. And every now and then, for a few seconds, our world touches its world, and somebody happens to be holding a phone. That's what you're about to see. Not a monster. Not a movie. Just a normal night that stopped being normal. Turn the sound on. Full screen. Lights off. And watch the video below. Then come back and tell me the exact second you stopped breathing.

Earth Unveiled

36,197 görüntüleme • 14 gün önce

I am leaving San Francisco. My heart is broken... Thank You Gavin Newsom, London Breed, Scott Wiener, Connie Chan, Jennifer Friedenbach, Aaron Peskin, Dean Preston, Hillary Ronen, Myrna Melgar and all the other leftist anti-American politicians who destroyed one of the greatest cities in history. San Francisco used be to the most beautiful city in the world... Now how can I build a life for myself in this city, let alone start a family, with all this chaos, corruption, incompetence and lawlessness that plagues our community? I gave this city everything I had. Years of my life, my safety, my money, my energy. I fought for it. I poured out my blood, sweat and tears for it. I stayed when almost everyone else left. And now in order to save my own life, I must make the painful decision to leave. I don't want to go but I have to... Our government is corrupt to its core... leftist reptilians in suits who keep the chaos alive because it keeps their donors and “nonprofits” flush with cash. Our streets look like a third world country... open air fentanyl markets, tents everywhere, human feces, needles, trash piles and bodies on sidewalks. It’s not “progressive.” It’s a collapse. My family and friends? Most of them are gone either they left or they died here. None of my family and friends want to visit me and that's because traveling to San Francisco has become risky. Nobody wants to jeopardize their car or see the humanitarian crisis happening on the sidewalks. The cost of living is skyrocketing. Our wages stagnate and jobs are disappearing to robots and immigrants. You can’t afford to exist in San Francisco unless you’re already rich. I don't want to live paycheck to paycheck. I deserve to enjoy the fruit of my labor. I am paying the highest rates in the country for the least representation as our infrastructure falls apart... aging pipes, crumbling roads, power outages and the constant threat of The Big Earthquake. Our economy has hit terminal velocity. Businesses are fleeing, stores are closing and the tech bros who once promised utopia have replaced themselves with AI and automation. Now they’re laying their own people off while the executives hide behind private security. Illegal immigrants are prioritized over American citizens... luxury hotels, gift cards, free services, while our veterans sleep in the rain and our own homeless get ignored. Every single night my car is either ticketed, towed, broken into, or all three. These people openly prefer socialism and communism over conservatism. They say it with pride. And if you’re straight, white, male, or Christian? They hate you on sight. They treat you like you’re the enemy. No subtlety, no shame. The women here are in constant fight-or-flight mode. They only feel safe dating millionaires. The dating scene is a nightmare. I’m a good looking guy who knows how to talk to women, I do better than most guys and even I can’t get a real date without some woman asking how much money I make. How about, "How's the weather"??? The nightlife is dead. All my favorite bars, clubs, and restaurants have shut down. The few that are left charge $20 just to walk in, then another small fortune for drinks that taste like regret. The local newspapers are pure far left propaganda. If you’re a good guy who votes red and risks your life to stop a restaurant robbery... and actually thwarts the robber... they’ll still paint you as the villain. I’ve seen it happen to me and others. The coroner’s office can’t even keep up with all the goddamn bodies. They mix up the names of dead people with living ones, misidentified remains and dumped corpses in the bay because there’s just simply no room left anywhere else. Fentanyl is showing up on playgrounds and in schools. Public schools are indoctrination factories that teach kids to hate their own country while test scores plummet and parents pull their children out in record numbers. Scott Wiener wants kids who don't even know their ABCs and 123s to change genders and hide secrets from Mom and Dad. Leftist educators are predators. And algebra has become illegal. The public library has become a daytime drug den and homeless shelter, where you can’t even use the bathroom without stepping over people shooting up. Our parks and beaches are littered with human waste, stolen bikes, and abandoned tents... places that used to be beautiful are now no go zones. I need to escape the containment zone. The city’s budget is billions in the red and yet for some reason they keep spending on “equity” programs and luxury accommodations for non citizens while basic services like street cleaning and pothole repair are neglected. Mental health services are a joke... people in crisis are left to wander the streets screaming and the only “help” they get is a tent and a government-issued crack pipe. Yeah that'll help them. Crime statistics are deliberately underreported or reclassified so politicians can claim “declining crime” while residents live in fear. The city’s water supply is contaminated with everything from lead to fentanyl runoff, people are calling themselves "chemical babies" and they still charge premium rates for this water. San Francisco’s “progressive” housing policies have made it impossible to build affordable homes, leaving thousands sleeping in cars or on sidewalks while empty luxury units sit vacant. The transit system is a rolling mobile open air asylum disaster... buses and trains are filthy, unreliable, and unsafe, with assaults and thefts happening daily. I don't even want to talk about the things I have expirienced on the san francisco train. I have seen drug addicts fornicating, homeless people overdose, criminals fleeing the law, people using fentanyl, people pooping and peeing, families being attacked by violent lunatics, yeah, that San Francisco train is giving New York City's subway a run for their money. Animal control is nonexistent. Where is PETA when you actually need them? All these abused stray dogs, raccoons and abandoned pit bulls roam free while people get attacked in broad daylight. Roving packs of cayotes in San Francisco abandoned downtown financial district. Empty Skyscrapers and packs of Cayotes and we still vote Democrat. The city’s fire department is chronically understaffed and underfunded, yet they prioritize “climate justice” training over basic firefighting readiness. Streetlights are burned out for months at a time, leaving entire blocks in darkness while car break ins and assaults spike. The city refuses to enforce basic but will ticket you for the wrong color license plate frame. San Francisco’s “sanctuary city” policies have turned it into a magnet for international criminal , while local police have their hands tied by progressive DAs who refuse to prosecute. Even if they do, the judge just releases them the next day, The air quality is toxic from wildfires, encampment fires and unchecked drug use, yet they lecture residents about carbon footprints. The city’s recycling and composting programs are a farce... I used to work at the landfill... most of it ends up all mixed together in the landfills anyway, while residents are fined for using the wrong bin. Public restrooms have all been closed down because of the homelessness and fentanyl crisis in our community. Most bathrooms are permanently locked or destroyed, forcing people to defecate in alleys and doorways because the city won’t maintain them. Our local leaders fly private jets to climate conferences while telling citizens to stop driving gasoline powered cars. The city’s permitting process is so slow and expensive that small businesses die waiting for approval, while big developers get fast tracked. San Francisco’s “defund the police” experiment left the department gutted, morale crushed, and response times so slow that people just stop calling 911. When my front door got kicked in by burglars, I had to fight them off with my two hands because I didn't have a gun. When I called 911, I got a voicemail and told to leave a message at the beep. The city’s “equity” hiring practices have filled critical departments with unqualified people who prioritize ideology over competence. Not being white shouldn't be the only qualification somebody needs to get hired. Rat infestations are so bad that they’re now considered “wildlife” and protected, while residents wake up to rodents in their kitchens. The city’s homeless “outreach” teams hand out tents and needles but refuse to enforce any rules, turning public spaces into permanent encampments. Emergency rooms are overwhelmed with overdoses and psychiatric cases, forcing regular patients to wait hours or leave untreated. The city’s tourism board still markets San Francisco as a “world class destination” while tourists get robbed in broad daylight and leave traumatized. This isn’t the San Francisco I grew up loving. The city council spends more time debating pronoun policies and symbolic resolutions than fixing the actual problems residents face every day. Public art grants go to waste on virtue signaling artists instead of actual talented artists, while classic statues and monuments are removed or defaced for being too white". Street vendors operate illegally without permits, selling stolen goods and counterfeit items while legitimate businesses are crushed by regulations. Often times the fence guys are standing next to the fentanyl dealers. Fent is $3 a gram, cheaper than a loaf of bread, a gallon of milk and a gallon of gasoline. San Francisco’s “climate emergency” declarations come with more regulations and fees, yet the city does nothing to help Mother Nature. Look at The Great California Delta. It is dying. The public health department pushes endless vaccine mandates while ignoring the overdose epidemic killing thousands every year. All the while Gavin Newsom eats at the french laundry without a mask. The city’s “zero waste” goals are a joke... trash piles up faster than ever while residents are lectured about single use plastics. The board of supervisors routinely votes to protect drug dealers from prosecution while residents are left to deal with the consequences of their leniency on international criminals. Makes you wonder if they are being bribed or blackmailed? Our city’s “sanctuary” policies extend to protecting violent criminals, as long as they claim asylum or fear deportation. The SFPD has been reduced to a skeleton crew, and when they do respond, they’re often told to stand down to avoid “escalation.” The city’s homeless czars make six figures while sleeping in a luxury apartment, yet can’t explain why tent encampments keep growing. They are disconnected from the people they are supposed to help. Women disappear from the streets for days or weeks at a time, or sometimes never to return, only to turn up dead or never turn up at all, yet the city barely investigates missing persons cases anymore. Walking around downtown San Francisco, there are new missing women flyers every week. It is very disturbing. I might be silenced for discussing this one topic. Homeless women and children are left vulnerable in encampments with no protection, while predators move freely among the tents and no one intervenes. I shouldn't be seeing family units living on the streets but I am and across the street are billionaire tech offices. Theft is so normalized that people openly smash windows in broad daylight, grab packages off doorsteps and walk away with bikes while residents watch helplessly. No house or apartment is ever really safer. Shoplifting gangs hit stores multiple times a day, loading up carts and walking out without consequence, leaving retailers to eat the losses. Shelves are empty. You would think people are preparing for the apocalypse. Nope. THEY ARE SELLING THE STOLEN ITEMS TO BUY FENTANYL. Theft of catalytic converters, car batteries, and even entire vehicles has become so common that insurance companies are dropping coverage for entire neighborhoods. Good luck getting car or home insurance in California. I’m not abandoning San Francisco. I fought every day for years to save the city. Now I'm choosing to live. I’m moving somewhere I can breathe, build, create and follow my American Dream. Hope you understand. I can't keep living like this in this modern Sodom and Gomorrah.

Darren Stallcup - World Peace Movement

14,354 görüntüleme • 9 ay önce

💥 LAP Alert 💥 "I did this sort of spy thing where I changed hotel rooms and I changed taxis. I was making sure I wasn’t followed." ~Knapp Is Lacatski Lying to Us About the Craft and Breaching the Hull? ~ "If not for that [2017 NYT] story about AATIP and the problems that [Lacatski] saw with it, he would never have mentioned [AAWSAP]...I don't think, ever." ~Knapp (So, in other words...thank you from the UFO community, to the NYT, for getting it wrong? 🙂) ~ Jeremy Kenyon Lockyer Corbell: "Should we listen to Dr. James Lacatski on UFOs, on the fact, or the idea, that our government has at least one, he's admitted, and we breached the hull? Should we listen to him, George?" George Knapp: "I know a lot of people have noticed that he's talked about his role in counterintelligence as part of the AAWSAP program. And because they equate counterintelligence with lies, false info., cover stories, misdirection. Aha! He's putting out a bunch of false info. a decade after he retired from government service." (I saw one person suggest that, and I thought it was a questionable take...) Grant Lavac: "Given that Dr. James Lacatski was the 'counterintelligence coordinator' for AAWSAP, how much confidence can we invest in the veracity of his public statements that 'at least one recovered craft of unknown origin, a flying machine with no wings, no engine, no fuel, and no fuel tanks' is in the possession of the US government and that they had 'breached the hull' of the UFO? In the context of the counterintelligence value of UAP/UFO, his comments in this most recent interview on WEAPONIZED (edited for brevity) only raise more questions for me." ~~~ Knapp: "A, it's not [Lacatski]. He's not out there beating the bushes. He's talked to us, but that's pretty much it. He's telling the full story as much as he can in a series of books. And I was co-author on two of those, not on this one. And, you know, I remember the first time I met him, it was in 2018." ~ (In April of 2019, Knapp shared that story, minus Lacatski's name, at UFO MegaCon. Knapp in 2019: "I thought today I would share with you, sort of the informational foundation that I’ve acquired. So, one year ago, I made this trip to Washington, D.C. at the invitation of Senator Harry Reid. It was St. Patrick’s Day, 2018 and I already knew a little bit about AATIP and AAWSAP and what they’ve been studying and where the money came from and how the program was created. I did this sort of spy thing where I changed hotel rooms and I changed taxis. I was making sure I wasn’t followed. And if there was ever actually, anybody following me, they must have thought I looked ridiculous because it was way over the top. "But I ended up having to meet with Senator Reid and some other people who were directly involved in these programs and they gave me a download. And I thought I knew a lot about these programs when I went there and realized that I only knew a little tiny bit. The purpose of this was to learn about these programs. We all know about AATIP, but in reality, there was something before that. "I sat down for a couple of hours with Senator Reid and other people whose names, they don’t want to be known. They brought me up to speed on how AATIP was created. How its predecessor was under way for a number of years. It coexisted for a long time. People in this room. People who investigate this topic may have suspected for a long time that there was some kind of a program that still existed. We’ve all heard that Project Bluebook was the end. 1969 it ended and the government was done with UFOs. They closed up shop. And the reason they closed it down is because there was no evidence that it involved national security. "And we all knew that was baloney because of the stories that we’ve seen that are really well documented. For example, UFOs over nuclear missile bases. UFO encounters with the military installations and atomic facilities. Things of that sort the have been well documented over the years. There are cases that involved national security. So at the end of Blue Book, of course, this memo said, alright, any cases involving national security will continue to be investigated in the regular way. Well, what the heck was the regular way? We didn’t know. Well now we do know. At least a little bit of it." (Project Blue Book was shut down in December of 1969, but a few months earlier, in October, we had the Bolender memo, which noted that "reports of UFOs which could affect national security should continue to be handled through the standard Air Force procedure designed for this purpose." What standard Air Force procedure? The regular way? Where did those cases go? We still don't know what Bolender was referring to in that memo.) ~ Knapp in 2019: "And one of the regular ways was this program called AATIP. So I went on this trip. [and] I learned this stuff about AATIP. I had known a lot about it before but I got this briefing about this alphabet soup of different programs, how they began and what they studied. December 2017, the New York Times breaks this story about AATIP. Now, I had known about it for a long time because I lived in Las Vegas. I knew Bob Bigelow. I knew Harry Reid. We’d talk about UFO stuff and what was going on. "So when I was told the New York Times was gonna break the story, I’m kind ticked off about it. Because hey, I’ve been sitting on this for a long time. Why don’t I get to break the story? And they had to, one after another, gently remind me, 'You know. You’re not the New York Times.' Which I had to admit! It was true. And if I had done the story, the Times had said that they weren’t going to do it if somebody else breaks it. So, if I had done it, it’d be another story from a UFO reporter. "The New York Times did it and they changed everything. Because they did it, wider organizations did it. Some of them took shots at the New York Times because The Times got the story and they didn’t. But that story was accurate, to a degree. But the story that it told was not the full story. AATIP, that we know about…the AATIP that studies nuts and bolts saucers…case of UFOs that have encounters with military units such as the USS Nimitz, that is studied by a group of people, Lue Elizondo was the head of it. "It’s not so much a program as it was a loose network of intelligence officials in different agencies, including the Air Force and the Navy, CIA, DIA, DARPA…there might be a couple of other agencies. But a case would come in from any one of their units [and] it would be shared with this group of people, analysis would be done, evidence would be looked at and then stashed in a draw and nobody ever sees it. It’s not passed up the chain of command. "In 2007, that changed. One of the guys (Lacatski. ~Joe 2025) I met with in this meeting in Washington is the one who changed it. He had been in the same position that Lue Elizondo had been in. And his name is just not out there. He grew frustrated with what was happening with the phenomenon and he suspected that UFOs flying around the sky, buzzing our military units every once in a while, is not the full story. Even if you could solve that part of the mystery it wouldn’t solve the bigger part of the picture. "So he grew interested in Skinwalker Ranch and he had read the (Knapp/Kelleher – 'Hunt For The Skinwalker') book. And after he read it, he called up Bob Bigelow and said…actually, he wrote him a letter and said, 'Hey, can I go to the ranch…go look around? I’m with the DIA.' Bigelow says, 'Come on out to Las Vegas and I’ll take you there.' And that’s what happened. He flew to Las Vegas. They flew on Bigelow’s jet. They went to the ranch. "This guy’s not there fifteen minutes and he has an experience. And I’m not gonna go into detail. I’m hoping that he’s going to maybe come forward at some point and describe his experience. But it was just for him. Of all the people in this room, in the encounter, he was the only one who could see it. He’s the only one who had an angle on this thing that appeared. And he’s pretending that he’s not seeing it but it’s right out of the corner of his eye. And he doesn’t say anything until he leaves the ranch. And he gets off and he asks Bigelow if he had seen it. And he had not. The other people who had been in the room had not seen it. "He flies back to Las Vegas, goes back to Washington, D.C. and looks up Harry Reid and tells him about it. Now Reid had some experience in these matters that I’ll get into in a little bit. But as a result of that conversation, Reid, who had an interest in UFOs and had maintained that interest over many years – and I can attest to that personally – called in a couple of his friends in the Senate – Daniel Inouye and Ted Stevens. They had a conversation in a secure room and they decided to provide some funding for a much broader study. Something that looked at…beyond flying saucers, that looked at other paranormal aspects…supernatural aspects that we would not normally associate with aliens or ETs. Assuming that that’s what this is, which I’m not sure anyone knows for sure. And that is how AAWSAP was born. The Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Applications Program." ~~~ Knapp Yesterday: "The only reason [Lacatski] came forward, he was ticked off about how AATIP had been described in major media reports, and no mention had been given to the actual, real program. That one that had a $22 million budget, lasted 27 months, and which put together the biggest UFO data warehouse in history, that had written all these papers that still have not been released." (In the most-recent interview (Part 1) with Weaponized, Lacatski let it fly with his issues related to the 2017 NYT article: "The initial reporting...by the New York Times story in 2017 was totally inaccurate. Contrary to what some people claim, the authors knew my name and position at AAWSAP, yet never attempted to contact me. Likewise, the The Washington Post. POLITICO (laughs) contacted me within hours after the articles were published in the free publications, asking for my opinion. They knew my name, they had my phone number. Why didn't they contact me [beforehand]?" ~Dr. James Lacatski on Weaponized ~ Knapp: "So, Jim was a counterintelligence guy for AAWSAP, but in this role. He wasn't putting out cover stories or lies, he didn't put out anything. The world didn't hear that AAWSAP existed until years later, at least by that name. There was one statement made to the press about that program. It was by Robert Bigelow, whose company, BAASS, got the contract. A week after he signed it, he came on with me on Coast to Coast AM and said, 'We got this program dealing with UFOs, we have an unnamed partner, and we're excited to get going.' That was it. "Jim Lacatski wasn't putting out PR releases about AAWSAP. There was nothing. That was the last thing anybody said until the New York Times did the AATIP story, and then Jim Lacatski felt the real story was being covered up. If not for that story about AATIP and the problems that he saw with it, he would never have mentioned this. I don't think ever." (Well, then, thank you to the NYT journalists and editors for pissing off Lacatski!) Knapp: "You'll recall, AAWSAP, at the time that things went downhill, that the funding was moved away, they were trying to make it into a SAP, a Special Access Program. And if it had happened, we probably would never have heard of it. If it had happened, Lue Elizondo would have been the counterintelligence guy for AAWSAP, that he had already talked to Lacatski. "But Lacatski is not proclaiming the greatness of the program. He's not out there beating the bushes on podcasts and newscasts, other than with us, and he never put out in counterintelligence. His role, counterintelligence, meant something different for AAWSAP. The thing that DIA had told him was, 'Look, you know, it's not a rogue program. I know it gets weird into some of the phenomena that was at Skinwalker Ranch and other places. We don't care. Here's what we care about: Don't let the secret out. We don't want to see this on the front page of the Washington Post. We want it kept secret.' (John Greenewald was one person questioning whether AAWSAP was actually a prosaic program and Lacatski just decided to go rogue with a foray into UFOs and the paranormal.) Greenewald Tweet: "Did the U.S. government really sanction this, and if so, is this really how it was run? Or was this a rogue operation by a select few on the inside playing with Uncle Sam's coffers?" (Greenewald was quote tweeting a Greenstreet hit-piece video on AAWSAP. In his interview on Weaponized aired over the past few weeks, Lacatski said that former Deputy Director of AARO, Tim Phillips, also used the "rogue" word when describing AAWSAP. Did DIA really not know what AAWSAP was about? Did Lacatski go rogue and turn a program that was supposed to look at prosaic, advanced technology into one that studied UFOs and the paranormal? Here's an exchange from the 2023 interview Knapp and Corbell did with Lacatski and Colm Kelleher.) Kelleher: "The critical part of AAWSAP that we tried to convey in 'Skinwalkers at the Pentagon,' was that there were two fundamental, parallel tracks that AAWSAP ran on. The first one was the examination of UFO performance. And, you know, the UFO performance part was getting all of the data from eyewitnesses, plus deploying sensors into the field, in order to gather data on the performance of UFOs. That was track number one. And track number two was: What effects do UFOs have on humans? That was a parallel track that, from the get go, AAWSAP decided, unambiguously, to run both tracks in parallel. We documented psychological effects, and then we also documented paranormal effects." Lacatski: "Anything can be said on the internet it seems, factual or not. Well, one thing that is not factual is, DIA knew what it was getting into in regard to both aspects that Colm just described to you. And let me end my statement right here. We had no choice but to pursue both aspects." (That was a poor way of him saying: The claim that DIA was unaware of AAWSAP looking into all aspects of UFOs, including the paranormal, is NOT true.) Lacatski: "I want to emphasize something I said on my first and only interview. It was a closed program. It operated very similar to a SAP. The director, the director of analysis, and my office chief...and, of course, division chief, knew about this program. No one else did. Now, I was also protected by the stovepipe nature of that. I did not have to address political-type questions. I was insulated, but they were, too. There was no one else. People in the surrounding cubicles didn't know. Nothing was purposely being hid. It was a closed, stovepipe system, and it needed to be. It needed to be operated that way." ~~~ Knapp: "And so, Jim Lacatski took it on himself, put it in his own hands. He and Colm Kelleher interviewed all these people who applied for the jobs, the 50 full-time positions that they staffed, in a matter of months. They did background checks, they required security clearances for all those people, and they were worried about leaks. They didn't want information to get out. "They also were concerned about espionage by foreign players, by foreign companies, things of that sort. And some of that really did happen. As Jim has shared with us, there were a couple of phones that were transmitters that were found inside Bigelow Aerospace, inside the Bigelow, uh, facilities, and it was very alarming because they weren't sure who was doing it. I think they think it was a foreign government. I'm not going to say which one, uh, they suspected the most." (Lacatski said that the phones in question were made in China.) Knapp: "But, and then they also found weird frequencies emanating from Skinwalker Ranch. That's not strange, and there's a lot of unusual stuff that happens there, but it was some sort of a an espionage program that they believed was was not only looking at the ranch, but also at BAASS. "That was his primary concern. He was worried that the story gets out, because secrecy was of paramount interest to the heads of DIA and he's worried about the information getting out to the public. Because once it happened, then the knives come out in the Pentagon and within the intelligence community, which is kind of what happened. A memo was sent from Harry Reid's office, let other people know that AAWSAP existed, and that's when things started getting problematic." Corbell: "The bugging thing. So, it's not just like Bigelow Aerospace was tapped with something, he said, specifically, AAWSAP, right? So they were looking at that new UFO program. And I don't know how public this is, but he did say it was - not just him, other people have all said - it was multiple nations, multiple, different devices from those phones. And he also said that they worked with FBI, they had FBI liaisons looking at the ranch property, and also at Bigelow Aerospace. "Because, remember, they were supposed to receive a transfer of materials. That's why they reverse, reverse engineered (laughs), you know, they built everything to be able to hold SCIF-capable and material-capable property at that classification level. So, look, I think if we pull it back, the whole idea is, James Lacatski made a statement at some point that he was, you know, head of, or part of, or running the counterintelligence for AAWSAP. But his point was to keep AAWSAP itself secret from foreign nations. So then he has to keep it secret from the U.S. He did it. He did a great job. They actually kept it secret. That doesn't mean he's going out and creating false information to the public like he's been accused of. "So, should we listen to Jim Lacatski? That was like, you know, the main question. Oh, one second. He also identified that there is currently a counter-programming, counterintelligence operation going on to the American public, but not against the American public, by AARO." (In other words, spread misinformation to the American public so they can advance their goal of misinforming and confusing our adversaries who are always listening. National security! IMO, that's only acceptable if we're talking specifics related to propulsion, technology and weapons that can be used to give us a leg up on said adversaries. But everything else should come out and be made public. We shouldn't be told a bunch of lies about information we paid for and that could, potentially, give us some clarity about our species and other lifeforms on this planet.) Corbell: That was so clear in our interview with him that he said that, you know, 'Look, they're acting this way. They are telling you lies about AAWSAP and what happened.' And that's why he said, 'My books, I'm a government employee. This was paid by taxpayers. I'm trying to give you information.' And that's what his books are. "So it's clear from these rounds of interviews that we just had with Dr. Lacatski that he supports a controlled UFO disclosure. He made that very clear. So should we listen to what he has to say? I mean, he was a big dog, right, George?" Knapp: "He was the head of the largest U.S. government-funded UFO investigation in history, that we know of. He worked with Colm Kelleher, who was the boots-on-the-ground guy in Las Vegas. He worked with Jay Stratton. Stratton's role in the development of AAWSAP has not been really fully explored, but he's got a book coming out at some point, once it gets through the DOPSR process. But then we'll get additional information to buttress what Lacatski has said."

Joe Murgia

56,558 görüntüleme • 10 ay önce

A dog just made the bravest decision I have seen anyone make this year. Not a founder. Not an athlete. Not a person with a plan and a five-year vision board. A dog, on an empty road, with nothing to lose and no idea what would come next. I have watched what comes next more times than I will admit in public. This post is 25,000 characters long. It is a list of reasons why you should watch it too. Read as much as you want, but understand one thing before you start: the video is the only part that matters, and this is everything the video doesn't have room to say. Sound on. Phone in both hands. Do not skip. I'll be here when you get back. THE NUMBER THAT SHOULD BOTHER YOU Let me start with two numbers. The first: commonly cited estimates put the world's stray dog population at around 200 million. Two hundred million animals with no address, no bowl with their name on it, and no one who would notice if they didn't come back tonight. The second number is one. That is how many people had to be on that road, at that exact minute, looking in that exact direction, in a good enough mood to stop. Not two. Not a crowd. One. Here is what nobody says out loud: for every dog you see rescued on camera, there are millions the camera never reached. We don't see them because no one was there. The videos that reach you are not a sample of reality. They are the winners of a lottery so brutal that Powerball looks like a coin flip next to it. So when one of these lands in your feed, don't scroll past it like content. Treat it like what it is: a statistical miracle that happened to end well. And miracles have a structure. Let's take this one apart. FIVE LINKS. BREAK ONE AND THE STORY DOESN'T EXIST. Link one: the dog has to survive long enough to be seen. Roads are not built for small animals. Vehicles do not slow down for shapes on the asphalt. Every hour out there is a coin flip the animal has to win again, and again, and again. Link two: someone has to be present. Not nearby. Present. Eyes up, phone down, brain not busy replaying the argument from breakfast. Link three: that someone has to notice. It sounds simple. It isn't. The human brain is a filtering machine, and a small animal on a road becomes a plastic bag, a shadow, a piece of tire. The most common reason a dog is not rescued is not cruelty. It is that nobody registered it as a dog. Link four: the person has to stop. This is the link that snaps most often. Seeing is free. Stopping costs you time, comfort, a schedule, and possibly the mood of your entire day. Link five: the dog has to let them. An animal that has learned that hands mean pain has every biological reason to run. Trust is not a given. It is a negotiation, and the dog holds the veto. Five links. All five held. Remember that when you press play. You are not watching a nice story. You are watching a chain that should have snapped at least four times. THE PEOPLE WHO KEEP DRIVING In 1968, psychologists John Darley and Bibb Latane published a set of experiments that changed how we think about helping. The finding was uncomfortable: the more people who witness an emergency, the less likely any one of them is to act. They called it diffusion of responsibility. Everyone assumes someone else will handle it. So nobody does. Later research added nuance. When an emergency is clear and dangerous, people step in more often than the original theory predicted. But the core insight has survived half a century of testing, because it describes something every one of us has felt: the small, quiet voice that says, somebody else will stop. Now picture a road with no crowd at all. No audience. No one to hide behind. No one to blame. Just you and a decision that is entirely, inescapably yours. That is the situation the person in this video walked into. And the reason it is worth your attention is not that they did something impossible. It is that they did something small, and it turns out small is exactly what almost nobody does. You don't need to be a hero. You need to be inconvenienced. THE FACE IS THE RESUME In 2013, researcher Bridget Waller and her team studied dogs in a UK shelter and asked a simple question: what makes one dog get adopted faster than another? It wasn't size. It wasn't age. It wasn't coat color. It was one tiny facial movement: the raising of the inner eyebrows. The move that makes a dog's eyes look bigger, softer, almost sad. Dogs that did it more often were chosen faster. Six years later, a study led by Juliane Kaminski found out why that movement is so easy for dogs and so hard for wolves. Dogs have a small muscle around the eye that wolves largely lack. Over thousands of years of living beside us, dogs evolved a way to make their faces speak our language. Read that again. A species rewired its own anatomy to be understood by another species. No other animal has done this to us. Nobody taught them. Nobody forced them. They looked at us, worked out what we respond to, and grew the tool. Now look at the face in this video. You will know the second you see it. That is not a coincidence, and it is not luck. It is fifteen thousand years of engineering aimed directly at your chest. THE ONLY LOOP LIKE IT ON EARTH In 2015, a Japanese team led by Miho Nagasawa published a result in the journal Science that made researchers stop and reread the abstract. When a dog and its owner look into each other's eyes, both of their oxytocin levels rise. Oxytocin is the bonding chemical, the same one that flows between a mother and her newborn. Dog looks at human. Human's oxytocin rises. Human looks back, touches, talks softly. Dog's oxytocin rises. Which makes the dog look longer. Which makes the human's oxytocin rise again. A feedback loop of affection, running across two species, powered by nothing but eye contact. Here is the part that gets me: the effect did not show up the same way in wolves raised by humans. The loop is not just training. It is something that evolved between us. So the next time someone says a dog is just responding to food, tell them there is a peer-reviewed study that disagrees. And keep this fact in your pocket for the video. Because at some point, a moment of eye contact happens in it, and I want you to know what is really going on in that room. THEY CAN SMELL WHAT YOU'RE HIDING Humans have roughly 6 million scent receptors. Dogs are commonly cited as having around 300 million. A large share of a dog's brain is devoted to processing smell. What you experience as a room, a dog experiences as a layered document: who was here, how long ago, and how they felt. In 2022, researchers at Queen's University Belfast tested something remarkable. They collected breath and sweat samples from people before and after a stressful task. Then they asked dogs to tell the samples apart. The dogs got it right nearly 94 percent of the time. Your body broadcasts your emotional state as chemistry. You cannot turn it off. You cannot fake calm. A dog reads your fear, your tension, your irritation, before you have opened your mouth. Which means every rescue is, at its core, a test of one thing: are you actually calm, or are you performing calm? The dog knows. It always knows. And that is why what happens in the first few seconds of this video matters more than anything that comes after it. Watch the body language. Watch how slowly things move. Watch what is not done. THE MOST IMPORTANT MOMENT IN ANY RESCUE IS THE ONE WHERE NOTHING HAPPENS Animal behaviorists describe fear responses in four flavors: fight, flight, freeze, and fawn. Fight is what people expect. Flight is what most strays do. Freeze is what looks like calm but isn't. And fawn, the desperate, wiggling, please-don't-hurt-me appeasement, is the one that breaks your heart the fastest, because it looks like friendliness and it is actually terror. Rescuers who have done this hundreds of times will tell you the same handful of rules. Don't loom. Don't stare straight into the eyes. Get low. Turn sideways. Slow everything down until it feels absurd. Let the animal close the last few feet on its own terms. The hardest instruction, and the one most people can't follow, is the last one: do nothing. Every instinct you have says reach out. Grab. Fix. Take control of the situation. And every good rescue begins with someone who did the opposite. Who made themselves small, patient, and boring, and waited for a frightened animal to decide that the safest thing in its whole world might be a stranger. You are about to watch someone do exactly that. Notice how little they need to say. THE TEARS THEY WON'T PUT IN THE HEADLINE Scientists are careful people. They do not like to say "dogs cry." But in 2022, a team from Azabu University in Japan, led by Takefumi Kikusui, measured tear volume in dogs during reunions with their owners. The result: tear volume rose significantly compared with reunions involving other familiar people. And when researchers applied oxytocin to the dogs' eyes, tear volume rose again. Not sadness crying. Not the crying we do. Something else, something closer to overflow. The body producing water at the exact moment the heart has more in it than it can hold. Nobody has proven that this is the same thing we feel. Scientists will tell you that, and they are right to. But here is a question worth sitting with. If an animal's eyes fill with water when it sees the one being it has decided to trust, what exactly are we arguing about? Watch the eyes in this video. Then tell me what you think you saw. ONCE IT HAS A NAME, IT STOPS BEING A STATISTIC In 2007, psychologist Paul Slovic and colleagues ran an experiment on generosity. They showed people a fundraising appeal for a hungry child, and then a second version that added statistics about millions of other children in the same crisis. More data. More context. More reasons to care. Donations dropped. Slovic called it psychic numbing. The human mind can hold one face. It cannot hold two hundred million. When a tragedy becomes a number, empathy quietly switches off, and we don't even notice it happening. This is why one named animal in one small video can do what a hundred reports full of charts cannot. It gives your brain something it can actually care about: a single life, with a face, a fear, and a future that could go either way. The stray population is a statistic. A dog is a story. And stories, unlike statistics, come with a name at the end. When you reach that moment in the video, pay attention to what it does to you. Notice the small shift in your chest. That is the sound of a number turning into a person, or close enough. THE WORD FOR WHAT YOU'RE ABOUT TO FEEL Researchers have a name for the feeling you get when something touches you so suddenly that your throat tightens and your eyes sting. They call it kama muta, Sanskrit for "moved by love." Anthropologist Alan Fiske proposed that it is a distinct emotion, triggered by a sudden intensification of closeness. Two beings who were strangers become bonded. Someone who was alone becomes part of something. People across many cultures describe the same set of signs: warmth in the chest, goosebumps, a lump in the throat, tears they didn't plan on, and a strong urge to hug someone or hold something. Here is what makes it useful and not just sweet: kama muta is one of the most reliable emotional responses we have. It shows up when reunions happen. When a stranger helps unexpectedly. When an animal, after a long time alone, is finally held. You've felt it. You just never had a word for it. Take note of the exact second it hits you in this video. I promise there is one. And if you're the kind of person who says "I never cry at videos," I would like to schedule a follow-up. WHY YOU'LL WANT TO BE A BETTER PERSON AFTER ONE MINUTE Psychologist Jonathan Haidt studied a related feeling and gave it a name: elevation. Elevation is what you feel when you watch someone do something morally beautiful, quietly, with nothing to gain. It is not envy and it is not admiration. It is an urge, physical and immediate, to do something good yourself. In studies, people who experienced elevation were more likely to help others afterward, more likely to volunteer, and more likely to describe wanting to become better versions of themselves. Read that as a design spec. A short piece of true, unstaged kindness can change what a person does in the hour after they see it. Which is a strange, lovely thing for a phone to be capable of. We spend so much time discussing what social media does wrong. Nobody wonders what would happen if the best five percent of it, the small, real, human moments, were the part that traveled farthest. Let this one travel. It has earned it. THE RARE THING: SOMETHING TRUE THAT WINS In 2018, researchers at MIT published a study in Science that analyzed millions of tweets. The result was grim: false news spread significantly faster and further than true news. False stories were about 70 percent more likely to be retweeted, driven largely by surprise and disgust. The lesson most people took away was that this platform rewards outrage. I want to take a different lesson. If false stories win because they trigger strong emotion, then true stories can win too, as long as they trigger stronger ones. A video with no villain, no scandal, and no argument. Nothing to be angry about. Nothing to dunk on. A rescue that is exactly what it looks like. That kind of content should lose on this platform. It has no fuel. And yet every so often, one of them breaks through and reminds everyone what this place was supposed to be. I am not asking you to like it. I am asking you to notice that you had a choice about what to feed today, and this was one of the options. SOME FRIENDSHIPS SHOULDN'T WORK Somewhere near the end of this video, a second character enters the story. I won't tell you who. I won't tell you what happens. I will tell you that if you have ever read anything about instincts, hunting drives, or the way certain animals are supposed to see each other, this moment will quietly rearrange your assumptions. Behaviorists talk about prey drive as if it were destiny. It is not. It is a tendency, and tendencies can be softened by experience, by safety, by being raised, or re-raised, in a place where no one is afraid. The same dog that once had to look after itself alone can, in a different life, learn that the world contains creatures that are not threats or meals. Only neighbors. That is the most hopeful idea in behavioral science, and it usually gets buried in footnotes: what an animal was is not the same as what an animal can become. The same is true for most of us, incidentally. But that is a different post. Stay for the ending. It is the reason I am writing this at all. THE PART THE INTERNET NEVER FILMS Every rescue video has the same shape: the meeting, the rescue, the transformation, the happy ending. It is edited that way because it is the only shape that gets watched. But ask anyone who has actually done this, and they will tell you the truth is in the gap between the second and third act. The first night. The first week. The first time a dog that has never lived indoors realizes there is a floor that doesn't move, a door that closes without danger, and a bowl that will be full again tomorrow. Rescuers have a rule of thumb for this, the 3-3-3 rule. Three days for a dog to decompress. Three weeks to start learning the routine. Three months to feel truly at home. It's not science, exactly, just a shorthand built from thousands of adoptions. But it captures something real: safety is not a switch. It is a process, and the animal has to believe it slowly, one uneventful day at a time. That means the happiest scenes in this video are not the ones that look like celebrations. They are the quiet ones. A dog that stops scanning the room. A body that finally lets go. Look for the moment the shoulders drop. Once you see it, you'll never unsee it. THE COST OF STOPPING: NINETY SECONDS Let's do the math on the thing that most people are afraid of. How long does it actually take to stop for an animal in trouble? Not the whole rescue. Just the decision, the pulling over, the first attempt. Ninety seconds. Sometimes less. Ninety seconds is the length of a bad song on the radio. It is the time you spend waiting for a light to change. It is a scroll through a feed you won't remember. And on the other side of those ninety seconds is the difference between a living animal and a statistic. I'm not saying this to make anyone feel guilty. Guilt is a terrible motivator. It makes people avoid the feeling instead of acting on it. I'm saying it because the barrier is almost always imagined. We inflate the cost of helping in our heads, and the imagined price is what stops us, not the real one. The person in this video paid the real price. It was small. What they got in return is something no one could have planned for. That is the part you should watch closely. IF YOU'RE EVER THE ONE ON THAT ROAD Save this section. Someday, someone reading it will need it. Put your safety first. Pull over where it's safe and turn on your hazard lights before anything else. A second accident helps no one. Do not chase. A frightened dog runs faster than you and directly into the worst possible place. Chasing turns a rescue into a pursuit. Get low and go slow. Sit down if you can. Turn your body sideways. Avoid direct staring. Speak softly, or don't speak at all. Use food, if you have any. Something plain, tossed a little closer each time, works better than any technique. Check for a tag and, if you can get near enough, ask a vet or shelter to scan for a microchip. Someone may be looking for this animal right now. Call for help early. Local rescues, animal control, and vets can handle what you cannot. Sometimes the bravest thing you can do is make the right phone call. Take photos and note the location. If you can't keep the animal, those details are what let someone else finish the job. None of this is complicated. The reason it is rare is that most people have never been told that it is allowed. You are allowed. THE REAL STAKES OF A SMALL DOG Here is a bigger picture, and it's a heavy one. Millions of companion animals enter shelters every year in the United States alone. That is just one country. Many are lost pets that never get reclaimed. Many are strays. Many are animals whose owners ran out of money, time, or hope. Shelters are often crowded, underfunded, and staffed by people running on love and very little else. Every animal that finds a home, or a foster, or a stranger with ninety seconds to spare, frees up a space for the next one in line. That means every single rescue is bigger than the animal in it. It is a small change to a very large system, and the system is nothing but small changes stacked on top of one another. This is not an argument for guilt. It's an argument for scale. One dog saved is one dog saved, but it is also proof of concept, a demonstration that the chain can hold, that the odds can be beaten, that a person and a road and a decision can end well. And proof of concept is contagious. That is why you are seeing it. WHO REALLY GOT RESCUED? If you talk to people who have taken in strays, you'll hear the same sentence over and over, in different words. "I thought I was saving him. It turned out he was saving me." Skeptics roll their eyes at that. It sounds like a greeting card. And research on pets and wellbeing is more mixed than social media would like. It doesn't say every dog fixes every life. But there is something real underneath it, and it's not mystical. A dog is a machine for creating routine, attention, and reasons to leave the house. It needs you at a certain hour. It notices when you come home. It doesn't care about your job title, your follower count, or what you failed at last week. For some people, that is the first unconditional witness they have had in years. The rescue, in this light, is not one-way. Two lonely creatures, one who knew it and one who didn't, found out that they could take care of each other. Nobody can prove that from a video. But there is a version of the story that runs in the background of every rescue, and you can feel it if you let yourself. Tell me whether you feel it here. THE ATTENTION PARADOX Here is a strange fact about the platform you're reading this on. The average post gets a glance. A few words, a flick of the thumb, gone. Brands spend billions every year trying to buy three seconds of your attention, and most of what they buy evaporates before it lands. And yet a video of one dog, with no budget, no celebrity, and no script, can hold a stranger for a full minute. Without a single trick. Why? Because attention is not really about tricks. It is about stakes. Your brain is built to track living things whose outcome is uncertain. The moment there is a creature on screen and you don't yet know if it will be okay, some ancient part of you leans in and refuses to look away. That is the secret behind every great story ever told. Someone we care about. Something that could go wrong. A question we need answered. Marketers call it a hook. Your nervous system calls it worry. This video has both, and it pays off the worry honestly, which is why you leave feeling better instead of used. That is rare enough to deserve a full minute of your life. HOW TO WATCH THIS Most people will watch it wrong. They'll half-look at it between two other things, mid-scroll, thumb already moving. Here is how to get the actual effect. Turn the sound on. There is more happening in the audio than you expect. Make it full screen. This is a story about faces, and faces need room. Watch the first ten seconds without expecting anything. The film is quiet at the start. That is deliberate, or at least it works as if it were. Do not skip ahead. The whole thing depends on the distance between where it starts and where it ends. Skip the middle and the ending is just a nice clip. Then, once it's over, watch it again. The second time, you won't be watching for the story. You'll be watching for the small things you missed: a hesitation, a glance, a change in how a body carries itself. That second watch is where it gets you. I said I have watched it more times than I'll admit. That is the honest reason. It doesn't wear out. It gets deeper. THE CHALLENGE I want to try something with this post. If the video moved you, leave one comment: the second it happened. Not a review, not an analysis. Just the moment. I'm curious whether it's the same one for everyone. My guess is that it isn't, and that the spread of answers will say more about what people carry around with them than about the video. If it didn't move you, that is fine too. I'd like to hear that as well. Honest is better than polite. And if you have ever been the one who stopped, and I know some of you have, write that instead. Tell the story in two lines. No one has ever regretted the ninety seconds. Someone reading this thread might need to know that. Reposting this is the simplest way to put it in front of someone who's scrolling right now, in a bad week, thinking that nothing good happens by accident anymore. Something did. THE LAST THING Let me end where I started. A dog made a decision on an empty road. It could not have known how it would turn out. It had no reason to believe that the next hand would be different from the last. It went ahead anyway. That is the whole difference between a life that changes and one that doesn't. Not certainty. Not a plan. A willingness to move toward the unknown when the alternative is more of the same. The animal in this video did that. Then someone did the same in return. That's it. That's the entire story. Two beings, each of whom took a small, terrifying step toward the other, and a road that was, for a few seconds, the most important place in the world. Scroll up. Press play. Watch the ending. Then come back and tell me I was exaggerating. P.S. If you read all of this, you are exactly the kind of person this video was made for. Most people never make it past the first screen of a long post. You did. That tells me you are someone who stays: through the slow part, through the uncertain part, all the way to the end. Which is, when you think about it, the only quality that mattered in the story you're about to watch. Follow for more like this. I only post the ones that earn it. Bookmark it for days you forget the feeling. #Rescue #DogsOfX #SecondChances #AdoptDontShop #Dogs #AnimalRescue #RescueDog

Earth Unveiled

15,706 görüntüleme • 23 gün önce

Dear Lexxie (Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez)... (May I call you Lexxie? You can call me Dev. ) We probably wouldn't get along very well. I'm a throw-the-communists-out-of-helicopters anarchocapitalist, and that's probably too big a political gap to bridge with a few interpersonal gestures. However, like each other or not, I'm going to assume you are asking in good faith, and I'm going to answer you. I'm not going to answer your exact question, though. It's the wrong question. An answer wouldn't get you the information I think you are actually looking for. It looks like you're assuming that the neo-republican "MAGA" movement works like a traditional campaign. You develop a message about how your platform will be good for people, and your opponent's platform will be bad for them, then you get that message out on various channels, and it persuades some people to vote for you. That's definitely how democrats work. You are the party of television. And it's how old, pre-2015 republicans worked, too. You know, all those guys like Romney, who have been exiled to the wilderness, or, in the case of Cheney, have joined the democrats. MAGA doesn't work like that. We didn't vote for Trump because he persuaded us by getting XYZ message out on the UVW channel. We voted for Trump because we were waiting for someone like Trump to come along, so we could vote for him. That's why Trump didn't really have to do much of anything to beat you. He just had to position himself as the anti-establishment candidate, then get out of the way and let things happen, without making any major mistakes. The field was primed for him before he ever announced that he would run. Why? Because of one key insight that I don't think democrats have ever had. Elections are not about policy. They are not about personality. They are not about experience. They are not about charisma. Elections are about trust. Trump was elected in a landslide in 2016, 2024, and probably 2020 as well if you discard all the fake ballots, because more people trusted him, and less people trusted Clinton, Biden, or Harris. If you think about it, it's really pretty obvious that trust is the only issue that matters. Here's an example. Democrats campaigned against Trump by pounding on the abortion issue and cosplaying as fictional sex slaves from a kink novel for lonely cat ladies. And it worked with your base. Despite the fact that Trump had released a public statement that he would veto any national level restrictions on abortion, and that it was the Supreme Court, not he, who had overturned Roe-Wade in the first place, not even on ideological grounds, but because it was bad lawyering. Why did it work? Because those people didn't trust Trump. So anything he said about his intentions on the abortion issue was meaningless to them. It's all about trust. So why did more people trust Trump? And why do I say they were waiting to vote for him before he even came along? Because trust in Trump is rooted in distrust of the Machine. The Machine is the system of informal, unacknowledged relationships between people who have clout in the federal government and use it to benefit themselves, to benefit each other, and to protect their power base from outsiders. In other words, the federal government is corrupt, and the majority of Americans know it. Resist the temptation to argue with me here, even inside your own head. We are talking about why people voted for Trump. It's important what they believe, not whether you agree with them. Now, I could go on all day with examples of the Machine, and its fairly obvious abuse of power and funds. I could talk about fake vaccines that turned out to be neither safe nor effective, which made a lot of money for people who are vaccinated against any liability by your own organization... Congress. But that would sidetrack us, because you'd succumb to the temptation to argue about each one, and it's not important whether you agree. What's important, once again, is what the majority of Americans agree on. They agree on the existence of a Machine. They agree that the Machine has political influence which does not come from the "just consent of the governed". They agree that the Machine is materially harming them by enacting policies which hurt them. They agree that the Machine is materially harming them by spending their money on things that are not in their interest. They agree that the Machine is materially harming them by failing to faithfully carry out the actual duties of the federal government. They hate and distrust the Machine. All of this has nothing to with Trump, because all of this became true before Trump announced he was running. As I said, people were waiting for a Trump they could vote for. This is why. But how did distrust in the Machine translate into trust in Trump? Simple. Because Trump is the enemy of the Machine. How do we know that? Simple. It's not just because Trump told us so. If it were merely Trump telling us so, he could have been lying. We know Trump is the enemy of the Machine, because the Machine told us so. We saw how desperate the Machine was to convince us that Trump was an icky superplusungood double-Nazi, when his actual platform was just straight-up 1960s democrat, John Kennedy style. We saw them hurling accusation after accusation, as if they were throwing pasta at the wall, seeing what would stick. We saw the press elements of the Machine continuing to hold to those accusations, long after they had been proven to not just be false, but to be deliberate lies. Every time the Machine told us that Trump was horrible, all it did was confirm what Trump was telling us... that he intended to fight the Machine. In 2016, that was enough to get him elected. Check the video below. Michael Moore was the only person who understood this in 2016. Thing is he understood Trump voters, but not Trump. He thought a Trump presidency would be disastrous. Turned that nothing much happened at all. The Machine fought him more or less to a standstill, and the only major way he moved the needle was in putting three constitutionalists on the Supreme Court. Now, that's no small feat. Helped us a lot, and will for years to come. But the border security system didn't get finished, Mexico didn't pay for it, etc. Thing is, that's not important. What's important is why. We saw the fight between Trump and the Machine. It wasn't about whether he could beat the Machine or not. It was the fact that he willing to fight it, and the fact that we could see the fight. And that proved that his intentions were at least partially what he said they were. In 2024, he looks a lot more prepared, and has a team of heavy hitters backing him But there's one more set of questions to ask, here. Why did Trump run as a republican? Why is it Democrats, in particular, who are identified with the Machine? Well, the easy answer is that you keep running Machine candidates. Obama looked like an outsider, but he integrated into the Machine with great enthusiasm the microsecond he took office. Clinton and Biden were personifications of the Machine. Harris was the same, only dumber. But the deeper answer is that democrats have been in power for 12 of the past 16 years. And what y'all chose to do with that time was expand the Machine and integrate yourselves with it for ego-gratification and profit. Again, resist the impulse to argue. We may be at a disadvantage against you because we don't sign the paychecks of a legion of armed thugs, but that doesn't make us somehow dumber than you, or oblivious to what's going on. We know what "Ten percent for the big guy" means. And we don't stop knowing it when Comrade Squealer gets on MSNBC and launches some convoluted deflection filled with mental gymnastics we aren't morally flexible enough to replicate. Now, you, Lexxie, can argue that you're not a part of that. Maybe it would even be true. Or partially true. Maybe, through the awesome power of wishful thinking and historical ignorance, you actually are a sincere socialist, who thinks that statist, collectivist policies will actually benefit people, rather than just provide politicians with opportunities to steal and ruin people's live with a stroke of the pen out of sheer sadism. But you're not asking why you lost. You didn't lose. Harris lost. You're asking why Harris lost. Harris lost because we are aware of the Machine, and we don't like it. Trump is just our plan A to dismantle it. Let's all just hope we don't have to go to plan B. Plan B wouldn't be fun for anybody.

Devon Eriksen

477,128 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

"If [Ross] had phrased it like that in the N2K segment, I think most people wouldn't have pushed back so hard." ~Murgia Lockheed, Landing Drones, Stupor, and Trump Did think this would be another LAP (Long-Ass Post), but here it is. Ross Coulthart: "It's been a very interesting week with the public response to the comments that I've made on the show that I do with my friend and colleague,Bryce Zabel, "Need to Know," where we discussed what I've been told by my sources, multiple sources, by the way, that Lockheed Martin was indeed behind the Tic Tac encounter of 2004 with the USS Nimitz battle carrier group." Let's rewind: This is what Ross and Bryce said on the @Coulthart_Zabel episode uploaded on July 6th. My comments in ( ). Ross: "I now know, categorically, that the Tic Tac is Lockheed Martin technology. Categorically." Bryce: "Ooookay." Ross: "The Tic Tac is Lockheed Martin technology. Why are we being lied to? This is the issue. Why is the United States government now participating - at White-House, executive level, in collusion with the national-security state - to keep secret the fact that they've made these advances? I suspect it's because they've realized that they're being overtaken by their foreign adversaries, and they don't want you to know that." Bryce: "Okay, the Tic Tac is Lockheed Martin. Well, in some respects, given how insane the Tic Tac behaved during the Nimitz, where it went from 80,000 feet to sea level in less than a second, then I would say, well there's one for the U.S. team. Obviously, we have some good stuff out there, if that's the case, right?" Ross: "How much of that is being shared with the actual Defense Department that's responsible for the defense of the United States? This is the kind of questions that Congress should be asking." Bryce: "So you're saying Lockheed Martin might - or anybody, but Lockheed Martin in this particular case - has a Tic Tac that they are testing, and have been testing, and have access to." (One can argue that when Bryce said LM has a Tic Tac that they've been testing, that could include the possibility that it's an NHI craft they somehow acquired and not something they built. That would go against my "Ross is flip flopping" allegation.) Bryce: "But they might not have shared it with the Defense Department of the United States? Which probably paid for it in their trillion-dollar budgets. That's kind of mind-blowing in itself." Ross: "Those are the questions I think Congress should be asking. I mean, what I'm saying, basically, is..." Bryce: "Why are you saying this, by the way? Where did you? Where is this from? How do we know this? What's going on?" Ross: "I'm...I'm sorry, Bryce, I can't go there." ~ Bryce: "Frankly, the only major row that you and I have ever had, which was over eminent domain, and who can... Is it not possible that that legislation has eminent domain in it as an issue that the government would be able to go seize potential things from private enterprise, if the government, in fact, thought that Lockheed Martin had a Tic Tac? Wouldn't we want to go seize it?" Ross: "Bloody hell we would. Exactly. But that hasn't happened. And, you know, I can tell you, David Grusch has told them exactly where to look. Jake Barber has told them exactly where to look. This is why I just found it, in many ways, I find it absurd that we're still debating the issue whether the NHI technology recovery is real. Of course it's real!" (I think/suspect it's real. But if I'm gonna play journalist, I need to see proof before I say, "Of course it's real!" Or, "I know it's real." Walk me into the building and show me. I don't think this has happened with Ross so a debate is still warranted, IMO.) Bryce: "This thing you just said about Lockheed Martin. Is this the first time you've said that in public, or have you said that before?" Ross: "Look, there's been speculation for a while that it's Lockheed Martin, but I'm now very, very sure that it was Lockheed Martin. And I think the Tic Tac is part of two, at least two different platforms that Lockheed's been working on. Different platforms that they've been working on. And it's technology that, until very recently, most of Congress was completely unaware of." (To me, that sounds like Ross is saying, that whatever LM is working on, they built it.) Bryce: "Well, I just hope, if there's a war with China or a war with NHI, I just hope Lockheed Martin remembers who helped pay for it, and they're on our side. That's what I would say." Ross: "Well, I hope they are. I don't think we can have any expectation, though, unless the public demands answers, that we're going to get the truth." Full post here: ~And more from yesterday's "Reality Check"~ @MeaganOurada reads a question: "You recently mentioned the Tic Tac was a produced/manufactured by Lockheed Martin, but you never mentioned if it was under autonomous flight or piloted." (This shows that others took Ross's original comments as LM manufacturing a Tic Tac and not figuring out how to fly an NHI Tic Tac that they somehow had acquired.) Ross: "That's a good question, and I'll be honest with you, I don't know for sure." (Here was a chance for Ross to say, "I didn't mean to suggest it was 100% produced/manufactured by Lockheed, just that it was one possibility. The other is they operated a NHI Tic Tac that they had acquired.) Ross: "I have been told previously that when Tic Tacs... You see, one of the other things I want to clarify here as well is, there are NHI Tic Tacs." (We don't know that for sure, and later on, Ross adds that they are "suspected" to be NHI.) Ross: "A lot of people seem to be thinking that I'm suggesting that all Tic Tacs are Lockheed Martin. That's not the case at all." (A few people who follow me thought that but I think the overwhelming majority realize that Ross didn't say that.) Ross: "What I was told, and I'm reasonably sure that this is the case, is that Tic Tac was being operated by Lockheed Martin, and it's conceivable that that was being operated neuro-meditatively, psionically, by a human psionic, which is what I understand, is the way that these retrieved, non-human craft are being operated." ("Reasonably sure" and "operated," is different than what he said on N2K: "I now know, categorically, that the Tic Tac is Lockheed Martin technology. Categorically." I think most people took that as: "I now now, categorically, that Lockheed built a Tic Tac and that's what Fravor chased in 2004." That's why you saw such a pushback from people on social media.) Ross: "It's not clear to me, though, whether this is a craft that was built by Lockheed Martin, or whether it is Lockheed Martin testing the use of neuro-meditative signaling, as our friends at Skywatcher called it, to operate one of these craft. I just can't answer that question, specifically." (If Ross would have said this in the N2K episode and didn't use the word, "categorically," I think the reaction would have been, "Oh, that's interesting." I'm still skeptical that Lockheed has ANY role in the 2004 Tic Tac incident but I'll keep my mind open.) Ross: "All I can do is tell you what I've been told by my multiple sources, which is that the operation of the Tic Tac was being controlled, on the day, by Lockheed Martin." (Again, if he had phrased it like that in the N2K segment, I think most people wouldn't have pushed back so hard. I hope humans have developed the ability to control a Tic Tac and make it perform like what was reported on November 14th, 2004. But, again, I'm skeptical. The SPY-1 radar on the USS Princeton tracked objects for a week or so, leading up to the encounter Fravor and the others had with the Tic Tac. Were all of those objects LM-controlled craft? Seems unlikely. In 2019, at UFO MegaCon, Kevin Day said that on around November 10th, he started witnessing these strange tracks on his radar scope. He wasn’t really concerned with them because there was a lot of air traffic off the coast of California and they were a significant ways from the strike group. So they just monitored them and reporting them to 'higher authorities' and maintained track of them. They stood out and were anomalous because they were at 28,000 feet and going at 100 knots. Day said that was, 'extremely bizarre.' His entire job was to identify stuff and he had no idea what these were. None. Radar was shut down so they could do an extensive diagnostics to make sure it was working and these were real contacts. They were. ~ Just going through all the possibilities I can think of.... Did LM "hijack" or summon one of those craft, psychically, and "make it" have an encounter with Fravor and Friends? Or, maybe none of the above? Maybe it was a NHI craft and had nothing to do with LM? Remember, Fravor said it looked like it might be docking with a submerged object, so maybe that's why it was in that specific area? To me, that suggests NHI.) Ross: "Now I want to say here, let's be really clear about this: There is always the possibility that sources that talk to a journalist like me may be maligned. They may indeed be running some kind of psyop." (I know he has said that kind of thing in the past but I wish Ross had reiterated that point in the N2K segment. I have heard from a few people who think that's exactly what's happening here. And also, if his sources are so sure LM was involved and "operating" a Tic Tac, to me, it would make sense that they would also know whether it was a Tic Tac LM acquired or...a Tic Tac LM manufactured, based on reverse engineering the real thing.) Ross: "And of course I've taken that (disinformation/psyop) into consideration in asking the question. The difficulty is, I can't go into the detail, for very obvious reasons, about who these sources are and why I think so strongly that those sources are telling me the truth. And I can tell you, there are a lot of people who are assuring me that I'm flat wrong. And that's fine. But let's have a discussion about this." (Well now that "categorically" seems be to off the table, we can discuss it. BTW, back in 2019 on my blog, Dave Beaty 🇺🇦 and I discussed the possibility that the Tic Tac was human tech. I know others have discussed that, too, so it's not a new idea.) ~Ross then switches gears to the drones~ Ross: "And also, let's talk about what I think was actually another of the major points that I was trying to make in the course of that conversation I had with Bryce. Which is that there is an obvious contradiction between what the White House has said - that these were FAA-authorized drones operating [in] the continental United States in November, December, January - and what the U.S. Air Force has said. Which is two senior generals, one former, one serving commander of NORTHCOM, NORAD, responsible for the defense of the United States northern aerospace, stated categorically, on the record, that they have no idea who is responsible for those drone craft that were hovering over the continent of the United States. That's an obvious, logical contradiction." (In the March 16th episode of 60 Minutes with Bill Whitaker., we learned... Retired four-star general, Mark Kelly, went up to the roof and saw drones over Langley, from the size of a quadcopter up to the size of a small car. General Glen VanHerck (now retired) is the former commander of NORAD and NORTHCOM and told "60 Minutes" that we can't track the drones over Langley or see where they originated. "It's a capability gap. Certainly, they can come and go from any direction. The FBI is looking at potential options but they don't have an answer right now." General Gregory Guillot is the current commander of NORAD and NORTHCOM and told "60 Minutes," that, "the threat got ahead of our ability to detect and track the threat." Could we detect drones flying into Langley today? "At low altitude, probably not, with your standard FAA or surveillance radars. I don't think we know entirely what happened. It is alarming." And, as I've (Joe) been saying forever, a big problem was/is the rules of engagement that detail when and how you can shoot down drones. VanHerk: "It's been one year since Langley had their drone incursion and we don't have the policies and laws in place to deal with this? That's not a sense or urgency.") ~ Ross: "And if the president, think about this... If the president...it's actually a good point that actually supports the possibility that I might, in fact, be right, and that my sources are in fact telling me the truth. If the president is telling the American public they don't need to worry about these drones - drones which we know are operating anomalously, with anomalous characteristics - then what the hell is going on? It implies he's been briefed. (Okay, what Ross is saying here: If you combine the president telling us not to worry about the drones, along with these drones making anomalous maneuvers, it bolsters his claim that LM (and others) has advanced tech that can also be used in drone tech. And that the president has been briefed about this advanced tech. But the problem with that line of thinking is, when you look at what eyewitnesses have said about the drones (or whatever they were), in 99% of the cases, the only anomalous behavior was their ability avoid detection and go stealth. That's the low observability part of the UAP five observables that Lue Elizondo popularized. But no 90-degree turns or anything like that. I don't think anything the generals or Trump said bolsters the idea that Lockheed was involved with the Tic Tac in 2004.) Ross: "Just to add more smoke to the fire, earlier on today, I had a message from a guy in New Jersey who has seen one of these drones land in a New Jersey backyard. He was illegally pointing a laser beam at one of these drones, which you should not do. Naughty. Even if they are NHI or whatever they are." (I wish Ross had said, "a guy in New Jersey who CLAIMS he has seen one of these drones land." Ross was in Barcelona when recording this episode of Reality Check so there was no time for him to vet this story. It's such an outlier from everything else we have heard about the drones that I think we should remain skeptical about if it actually happened. Does this person have photos or videos? Are there any other eyewitnesses?) Ross: "This is what he told me: "I was beaming [the drones] one night around midnight, and the one flew straight over my backyard, stopped slightly above, and to my left, and seemed to sink down into the trees along the little street on the side of my house. The next thing I see is this rectangle-looking, box-like thing floating just above the street, about the size of an old Ford station wagon. It was the most incredible, starkly-lit thing I've ever seen. I've never seen colors so radiant, so intensely liquid-like in my life. Several shades of blues with oranges and yellows like intense neon lights. "'It scared the hell out of me, and I moved away from the window so it couldn't see me. I slowly poked my head around the window, and it followed every move I made. It knew I was watching it. I would pull back and it came up the street. I would move into the window and it moved back down the street. It was like we were synchronized, and I was completely freaked out to the point that I quickly ran into my kitchen and considered hiding under my sink, of all things. I found myself in some sort of stupor, like I was being drugged, confused and slowed down. So I went to my bedroom and got my point two five, and just laid back in bed. I awoke the next morning, still holding the pistol.' ~End Alleged Eyewitness Account in NJ~ Ross: "Something really anomalous that has no visible means of propulsion is landing in New Jersey, and your president is telling you he's not concerned about it. Yet, two generals responsible for the defense of the United States aerospace are telling you they're concerned about it, and they don't know what these objects are. Why is the president not concerned? And why are two U.S. Air Force generals, presumably, not briefed into what the president is briefed into? Think about that." (Allegedly landed in NJ. I don't think Trump knows more than the generals, and I don't think he was briefed into a program that they were left out in the cold on.) ~~~ @MeaganOurada reads another question: "Even if Ross seems confident that Tic Tac is U.S. tech, does he think it's a reverse engineering tech from NHI, or a tech 100% created by humans?" Ross: "As I've mentioned earlier, we're not saying all Tic Tacs are Lockheed Martin. And it's quite clear that some Tic Tacs are indeed non-human intelligence, or suspected to be non-human intelligence. But what we're talking about are objects that are showing the five observables, doing maneuvers and operating in ways that don't conform to terrestrial craft. "I can't answer the question, definitively, whether they are constructed by Lockheed Martin, or whether it's Lockheed Martin operating a recovered, retrieved craft." (Again, if he had said that in the N2K segment, there may have been less pushback. Did his sources not explain that aspect of the claim? Pretty important detail.) Ross: "Because what I've been told, and what jakebarber told me in the interview that you've all watched, hopefully, on NewsNation, is that there have been retrievals of craft, including Tic Tacs. So, why is it a surprise to people that a contractor, that I'm alleging is directly involved in the Legacy program, is involved in operating these craft." (Because when Ross spoke about this the first time, he made no mention of LM OPERATING the Tic Tac in the 2004 incident . If he didn't mean that Lockheed had BUILT or MANUFACTURED it, he should have made that clear. He must understand this.) Ross: "And moreover, why would we necessarily expect that people, even those flying in the carrier battle group, would actually know about this or be briefed into this?" (We didn't, and don't, expect that, and have been discussing it for the last 6 or so years.) Ross: "It would have been a really good idea if they were going to test this technology against the carrier battle group, to have let the people know." (Which people? How many? Fravor said they had around 6000 people on the Nimitz and Princeton, combined. If it was SAP-level, classified technology, they would've had to read all those people into the program before the test. Not realistic, IMO.) Ross: "And I think people need to be reminded that my good friend, Kevin Day, who I know disputes the possibility that the Tic Tac is Lockheed Martin... In my book, Kevin Day told me - and he said this in many, many interviews - that when, I think it was the admiral in charge of the carrier battle group, was told about the Tic Tac, he didn't seem very alarmed. Why not? Why aren't people asking these questions? Why was the commander of a carrier battle fleet - that was suffering incursions by anomalous objects doing the five observables during a hugely important and sensitive naval exercise - why wasn't he concerned about those craft? Think about it." (When I met Keven in 2019, he left the door slightly open to the possibility that it was our tech. And I can't find anything about an admiral onboard the Princeton in Ross's book, "In Plain Sight." The only thing that resembles that claim is this excerpt about the captain. I also wrote about the captain in my blog in 2019.) From In Plain Sight... Kevin Day recalls asking his captain on the Princeton afterwards what he thought the object was. 'He told me, “I think the objects were spontaneously forming ice falling from space”.’ Day laughs at the absurdity of such a conclusion. His captain left him with the clear impression he knew a lot more than he was letting on about the phenomenon." From My Blog in 2019... "November 14th, they’re doing air defense exercises, also known as ADEX. Day pulls Captain Smith aside and tells him about the contacts that he and the others had been tracking and that he’s worried about 'safety of flight' because they could have a mishap with one of these craft as they conduct their exercises. Day highly recommended that they go check them out. Smith agreed and told him to take the Fast Eagle flight and 'go get ‘em.' Day said, “in the back of my mind, I was like, hell yeah! We’re going to intercept these things!” (audience laughs) It turned out to be his very last intercept in the Navy." (So, apparently, the captain WAS concerned leading up to the encounter. More from my 2019 blog...) "Voorhis shared that his captain had started a rumor that the objects were spontaneously forming ice in the atmosphere. He said he and his buddies would all sit there, smoke and say, 'Yeah, right.'" (For me, none of that is enough to suggest that the captain knew LM or some other humans/military/USG were behind the Tic Tac events. Maybe the captain thought it was something alien but didn't want the sailors to lose focus for their upcoming role in Iraqi Freedom? Or, maybe he was scared of the possibility of a non-human intelligence among us? I don't know. I'm not positive, but I think Ryan Graves mentioned one of his superiors giving a muted reaction to some of the UAP events they were facing on the East Coast.) ~ "Commander David Fravor responded to me: the Tic Tac 'was not Lockheed Martin', according to him. He seemed very confident and matter-of-fact." ~Jesse Michels Ross: "Let me first say I have nothing but admiration for David Fravor. He's given service to his country, he's a patriot, and he deserves respect and recognition for that. I'm not getting involved in a stash with a person who's done so much, honorably, for his country. It's not, though, outside the realm of possibilities. In fact, I think it would be extremely unlikely that, if there is, as I know there is, a compartmented, secret program where Lockheed Martin is one of the primary contractors operating retrieved, non-human technology and attempting to reverse engineer that technology, there is absolutely no way that David would be briefed into that, unless it was absolutely necessary for the doing of his job." (I've been saying this for several years and I agree 100%.) Ross: "As we all know, when the government wants to protect a secret, it compartmentalizes it. Even if you have a Top-Secret classification - which I'm sure David probably had - it's also compartmentalized. And that's how the U.S. keeps its secrets. And I've spoken to people, literally in institutions in the United States, one of whom knows about the program, and the other of whom is in an adjoining office and has absolutely no idea. "I've had a situation where I've spoken to the head of a government agency that ought properly to have known about the Legacy program. That head of a government agency was not informed about the fact that we are recovering non-human craft and attempting to reverse engineer that technology." (Journalistically speaking, I would say, "The head of a government agency was not informed about the CLAIM that we are recovering non-human craft." No way for Ross to know that's a fact unless he's been read in to the program to see for himself. Belief? Yes. Knowing? No. I harp on this all the time and it's a pet peeve of mine because I think it's important.) Ross: "A person two rungs down was the person that the Legacy program was using to gate keep inside that institution. It's really interesting how they compartmentalize all of this. And so, absolutely no disrespect to David Fravor or my good friend, Kevin Day, but they're good men. The simple fact is, compartmentalization works." (Again, I agree 100%. If Admiral Wilson, the vice director of intelligence, and deputy director of the DIA, was denied access, then there's a very good chance David Fravor was, too.)

Joe Murgia

22,656 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

🛸 🔥 Grays vs. Reptilians — or Something Much Stranger? 🔥 🛸 “We’ve documented that.” ~Grusch, on apparent NHI-versus-NHI conflict “Is this some other kind of weird shit?" ~Grusch (That line stood out to me. ⬆️) Grusch - Tic Tac = Reptilians Davis - Tic Tac = Grays (Credit to Grusch for sharing things that most people will immediately reject because it's all so outside of their worldview and sounds crazy. Is it true? Let's hear from the people who claim they experienced this and let's see the photos, reports and videos Grusch says he's seen. Until then, I'm withholding judgment. But it's not as if we haven't heard about Grays, Reptilians, Nordics and others...for decades.) ~ Joe Rogan: "So tell me more about these Reptilians that your friend encountered. They were alive?" David Grusch: "Yeah." Rogan: "So they were alive post-crash?" Grusch: "Yes." Rogan: "Why do these things keep f*cking crashing?" Grusch: "So, some of it is NHI versus NHI." Rogan: "What?!" Grusch: "Yeah." Rogan: "They war in the sky?" Grusch: "Yeah." Rogan: "Isn’t that in the..." Grusch: "You think it’s like, wouldn’t they get along? They’re so advanced. But uh, the...we have records of them f*cking around with each other." Rogan: "Is that in the Mahabharata or the Bhagavad Gita?" Grusch: "I don't know." Rogan: "There’s like, talk about sky wars in ancient Hindu texts." Grusch: "Oh yeah, in the Vedic texts, the blue people. And I know that’s why you asked blue. I don’t recall them being that blue, but, you know." (He's referring to the human-looking cadavers. ⬇️⬇️⬇️ ⬆️⬆️⬆️ ) ~ Rogan: "Right." Grusch: "I got a short little look, I'm like, ten seconds." (Again, talking about the video pan Grusch says he was shown of human-looking cadavers.) Rogan: "Maybe when they’re alive, they’re darker." Grusch: "Well, that is true. There’s like a postmortem change in that affect (appearance/complexion is what he meant)." Rogan: "Sure, like people." Grusch: "Yeah." Rogan: "That’s what happens with people." Grusch: "That is true, because, you know, as they were struggling and then died, obviously, their affect changed (Cross-talk so I can't make out the last few words. Maybe, "looked like sh*t.")." Rogan: "Now, this friend that encountered Rep[tilian]... First of all, we’ll go to the Greek-god people first. What did their craft look like?" Grusch: "Uhh. boomerang, crescent moon, usually. Not all the time. It’s kind of like, once I go back, some people like to drive the Porsche 911. That tends to be - not all the time - but that’s what they like to roll up in [shrugs]." (What type of sources does he have for that? How many?) Rogan: "They talk about them as the Tall Whites." Grusch: "Yeah." Rogan: "Were they tall? Were they large?" Grusch: "They looked tall to me. I didn’t have..." Rogan: "Hard to tell because you don’t..." Grusch: "I didn’t have a ground reference, really. I would say at least human size. They could be like..." Rogan: "Just looked very similar to humans to you." Grusch: Yeah, they could be, my big ass is 6'6", but, like, they looked big." Rogan: "Similar to humans?" Grusch: "I think so. And, there might be taller... Once again, I’m sure there’s other stuff I don’t know about. I’m sure there’s other variants of them, too, that look more towards, like, the classic um... What is it in ufology, like, Nordic or, you know, Tall Whites - that are probably even taller." (He's sure there are other variants of the human-looking beings ? Based on what? Is that speculation or did he hear or read about that from a credible source, or sources? And I'm not talking about civilian reports.) Grusch: "If some of those experiencer stories are true, which, once again, as long as that source is credible, that might be a thing. So, I think we need to be prepared to kind of...that being a thing. I don’t know, So, yeah." (As long as which source is credible? Each individual experiencer, or the source(s) he (Grusch) dealt with?) Rogan: "Yeah, that makes sense. Now, the Reptilian craft, what did that thing look like?" Grusch: "That one is Tic Tac-looking." Rogan: "Uh-oh." Grusch: "Yeah." Rogan: "I was hoping they were the cool ones." Grusch: "Yeah." Rogan: "The Reptilian ones are the ones that everyone’s terrified of." Grusch: "Yeah, and once again, like, we’re doing like... And, of course, it’s not always the Tic Tac. Once again, kind of like, what I said, but, like, that tends to be them. From what I understand...obviously, hopefully I’m not wrong, but I’m, you know, pretty good sourcing on that." (Tends to be them? So the Reptilians sometimes ride in Tic Tacs, but other times they ride in craft that have different shapes or configurations? Or, are the Tic Tacs usually piloted by Reptilians but other times piloted by other types of beings? Why do I ask? ⬇️) ~~~ H/T: Neil Goodman for also noting this. Here's Dr. Eric Davis in the "Age of the Disclosure," released in November of 2025. Dr. Eric Davis: "We have seen highly-credible, U.S. government intelligence on the Soviet recovery of a crashed UAP in 1989. They recovered a Tic Tac-shaped UAP that was twice as big as the Tic Tac that was encountered by the USS Nimitz Carrier Strike Group, and they did recover four bodies of humanoid aliens. The Soviet scientists took apart the recovered craft and discovered a very advanced directed-energy weapon." ~ And this is from "Moment of Contact: New Revelations of Alien Encounters," released in December of 2025... James Fox: "Put me wherever you were when you got to see photographs of crash retrieval and documents. What did that feel like?" "Dr. Eric Davis: "That was startling, when I actually see recorded evidence with my own eyes. Photographs, reports, and whatnot. I can tell you, yeah, it's a crash retrieval, there's a craft, and there's alien bodies. That's all I can say about it." ~ (And finally, this, from an interview Josh Golembeske (Josh Golembeske) did with Dr. Eric Davis in July of 2026.) Josh: "Is that the one you saw in the photos, the Grays?" Davis: "Yeah. Yeah. This was foreign intelligence collected so this is a foreign crash, and that's classified, so I can't get into that. But the photos I saw came from the site of a foreign crash retrieval during the Cold War." Sourced here: ~ (If those comments refer to the same Soviet retrieval — and I'm connecting dots here — Davis appears to be saying the Tic Tac-shaped craft contained Gray bodies. Where does that leave us with what Grusch said about the preferred craft of the Reptilians being a Tic Tac?) ~~~Back to Grusch on Rogan~~~ Grusch: "When you see, like, malevolent behavior, right? It’s like, well, that’s a humanistic lens. You’re seeing, like, an animal-lash-out-in-captivity kind of thing. Or they’re in duress, they’re having an emotional experience, et cetera. And it’s like, you know, are they actually scary, or is it just because of the situations we’ve been in with them? And so, we’re kind of biased and all that. So, yeah." (In other words, the Reptilians might not be so scary and "malevolent" if we encountered them in a different situation. There are reports of positive encounters with Reptilians. Like this... ⬇️ ~ Rogan: "And so, these Reptilians, what did they look like?" Grusch: "Now, I’ve never seen that, personally." Rogan: "Right, but what did your friend describe them as?" Grusch: "But, it’s like, very, almost like, um, seven-foot-tall-plus, uh, sort of gorilla-looking, scaly skin, though." Rogan: "Gorilla-looking...reptile gorillas?" Grusch: "But there’s multiple types. There’s ones that are more humanoid-looking, so." (What's he basing that on?) Rogan: "There’s multiple types of Reptilians?" Grusch: "Yeah, and I’m not an expert on that one. That’s, once again, I never saw it in person to get the exact, you know, description." Rogan: "See if there’s an artist rendition (laughs)." Producer: "I'm looking already." Rogan: "Of course you are." Grusch: "Yeah, and once again, it sounds so schizo." Rogan: "It does (laughs). A gorilla with scales." Grusch: "Like, even for me, as an ex, deep-state intel officer, I’m like, I cannot f*cking believe I’m talking about this shit on Joe Rogan." Rogan: "Seven-foot-tall, scaly gorilla (laughs)." Grusch: "I know. I mean, it sounds schizo. And it’s like, coming from somebody like me, you know, who is a credible person and has been in government, it’s like, I’m gonna be that guy. I’m gonna be that guy. And then, like, down the road, people will review Joe Rogan and he’s like, 'That motherf*cker, we thought he was crazy, but, what do you know? You know, it’s true.'” (Time may tell.) Rogan: "Well, of course, if there are things from somewhere else, you’re going to sound crazy describing any of it." Grusch: "Because it’s so outside my experience, because I never had some kind of woo thing growing up or some sort of interaction with the phenomenon. So, it feels so outside my personal comfort level and experience because I’m relying on the personal experience of others, you know, audio/visual stuff." Rogan: "Yes." Grusch: "And it still feels like I’m watching a movie. Like, it’s like, “Is that...is it real?” I mean, I know it is, but, like, I have a cognitive dissonance a little bit, you know? So," (I'd think that most of the world will have cognitive dissonance if this is ever proven to be real.) Rogan: "And how were you able to watch this video? Do they have to put you into a secret room?" Grusch: "Yeah, I won’t get into the exact way it went down, but, uh, we’ll just say it was kind of sketchy, but...to keep everybody safe." Rogan: "And so, there apparently is NHI-versus-NHI warfare?" Grusch: "We’ve documented that." Rogan: "Documented it?" Grusch: "In collection. Well, what we perceive as warfare. So, unless it’s something..." (I'd love to see what intel has been collected and how many sources and incidents are involved.) Rogan: "Conflict?" Grusch: "Yeah, it looks like conflict, it smells like conflict. Is this some other kind of weird sh*t? I don’t know. And there’s maybe an assessment on that, but it..." ("Is this some other weird sh*t?" is an important comment from Grusch, IMO. It shows he's using his analytical mind (like all of us should be doing) and not accepting things at face value. Is it two NHI species at war with each other, or is that just what something wants us to think?) ~~~ "We're part of a symbiotic relationship with something which disguises itself as an extraterrestrial invasion." ~Terence McKenna “I think it’s something so bizarre that it actually masquerades as an extraterrestrial so as not to alarm us by the true implications of what it is.” ~Terence McKenna "I discussed this once with an entity and it said to me, 'Well, you know, we've disguised ourselves as an extraterrestrial invasion so as to not alarm people with what's really going on.'" ~Terence McKenna What did he mean by that? McKenna: "What I meant by that was that an alien invasion is a myth of our culture. Since the 50’s we’ve had the example of The Day the Earth Stood Still and When Worlds Collide right on up through that television series which I didn’t see, where they changed all the Nazis to aliens and then it was a huge success. So alien invasion is a piece of our cultural toolbox, but that’s not what’s happening. What’s happening is something… less easy to name than 'alien invader' is reaching out toward us. It could be the Gaian Mind, it could be the Oversoul of humanity… I don’t think it comes from the distant stars — it knows us too well, and loves us too much. It could come from the dead. Now that’s what I mean by something weirder than an alien invasion. An alien invasion compared to a collective mass contact by the dear departed is pretty mundane stuff. "So, whatever this thing is, it keeps itself masked. So what I mean is that our journey through time, our historical journey to this moment, has not been unaccompanied. We have always been accompanied by this thing. The Demiurgos — some people just throw down their cards and call it God and be done with it. I’m not ready for that, because I don’t think it’s the God who 'hung the stars like lamps in Heaven,' as Milton said. It’s not that God. If it is a god, it’s the god of Biology. And I don’t have any problem with that." He adds more and I'll link to that in the replies. Then we have this from 1970 and John Keel's "Operation Trojan Horse." ~Begin OTH Excerpt~ Whatever "it" is, it is often inimical (tending to obstruct or harm. ~Joe) to the human race, and the manifestations range from childish mischief to acts of horrifying destruction. The phenomenon has driven many people mad; but it has also produced miraculous cures. A cosmic system of checks & balances seems to be an actual fact. There are now well-documented cases of people being seriously injured, even killed, by flying saucers. But there are equally well-documented events in which the mysterious objects and their enterprising occupants have interceded directly in human affairs and thwarted disaster. Many flying saucers seem to be nothing more than a disguise for some hidden phenomenon. They are like Trojan horses descending into our forests and farm fields, promising salvation and offering us the splendor of some great super-civilization in the sky. But while the statuesque long-haired “Venusians” have been chatting benignly with isolated traveling salesmen and farm wives, a multitude of shimmering lights and metallic disks have been silently busying themselves in the forests of Canada, the Outback country of Australia, and the swamps of Michigan. Before we can find any answers, we must first find the right questions to ask. We must understand the exact nature of these visitors, and of ourselves. I also believe that this same phenomenon is flexible to an unbelievable degree. It can create and manipulate matter through electromagnetic fields above and below the range of our perceptions and our own technical equipment. The phenomenon is mostly invisible to us because it consists of energy rather than solid earthly matter. It is guided by a great intelligence and has concentrated itself in the areas of magnetic faults throughout history. It makes itself visible to us from time to time by manipulating patterns of frequency. It can take any form it desires, ranging from the shapes of airplanes to gigantic cylindrical spaceships. It can manifest itself into seemingly living entities ranging from little green men to awesome one-eyed giants. But none of these configurations is its true form. The UFO sighting data confirm this theory, but we lack the necessary technology to prove it conclusively. There are thousands of microscopic life forms in a drop of water. You can’t see them, feel them, or taste them because they are too small. A teenaged boy with a cheap microscope can peer into that drop of water and invade the privacy of those microbes. But the microbes don’t know he is there. They swim about in their liquid environment totally unaware that their tiny world is actually an insignificant part of a much larger, and very different, whole. Our world may also be part of something bigger, something beyond our senses and abilities to comprehend. That bigger something is undoubtedly made of energies, too. But energies of a different frequency, forming atoms radically different from the atoms of our own world. These energies could coexist with us and even share the same space without our becoming acutely aware of them. The evidence we have outlined in this book does clearly point to this unperceived coexistence, and now we must come to terms with "it" or "them" or the Great Whatzit in the sky. This intelligence is able to manipulate energy. It can, quite literally, manipulate any kind of object into existence on our plane. (Assuming what Grusch says is true, and there's evidence of conflict between different NHI, is the phenomenon able to manipulate energy and create multiple physical craft and "species" into existence, and make them appear to battle so that we think it's the Grays vs. the Reptilians? Or is it actually a battle between the Grays and Reptilians? I don't know, but I'd love to hear what Keel would have thought.) Back to Keel's OTH... There have been many bewildering accounts of shell-like objects with no visible means of propulsion, no signs of any kinds of technology. Contactee Reinhold Schmidt’s German-speaking ufonauts, who invited him aboard their saucer in Nebraska in 1957, didn’t walk but glided across the floor of their spaceship as if they were on roller skates. Other sober and baffled witnesses have described how the UFO occupants seemed to fly from the ground to their waiting saucers. Still others have claimed that the ufonauts simply walked through the sides of their craft like ghosts. In story after story we have testimonial proof that the objects and their occupants are not made of normal substances. The hard (seemingly solid) objects are another problem. Bullets have been fired at them and have ricocheted off. They sometimes leave imprints on the ground where they land. If they are the product of a superior intelligence with an advanced technology, they seem to be suffering from faulty workmanship. (Maybe Keel would differentiate between "soft" objects and beings allegedly manipulated into existence by the phenomenon, and hard, physical objects and beings allegedly recovered, captured, and sometimes killed, at crash sites? Maybe there are multiple intelligences at work here? One that is physical and one that is not physical but can mimic the one (or other ones) that IS physical? 😵‍💫) More from OTH... Since 1896 there have been hundreds of reports in which lone witnesses have stumbled onto grounded hard objects being repaired by their pilots. In flight, they have an astounding habit of losing pieces of metal. They seem to be ill-made, always falling apart, frequently exploding in midair. There are so many of these incidents that we must wonder if they aren’t really deliberate. Maybe they are meant to foster the belief that the objects are real and mechanical. In the foregoing I have tried to demonstrate how the soft objects seem to be directly related to the electromagnetic spectrum. This is hardly a new theory. Not only have the occultists, spiritualists, and religionists been telling us about frequencies, vibrations, and the color spectrum for centuries, but modern researchers such as Dr. Meade Layne worked all of this out years ago. Dr. Layne evolved a theory of mat' and 'demat; (materialization and dematerialization) of extradimensional objects. His findings were privately published and not very widely circulated. Others, such as British ufologist Harold T. Wilkins, also worked this out and published books about it in the early 1950s. But the spectrum theory lacks the strong emotional appeal of the extraterrestrial thesis. There is a rather curious entry in Project Blue Book Report No. 14 (1955) on page 295. In the section showing how various sightings are classified, "number 8 in Code 79-80 Final Identification is "Electromagnetic Phenomenon." This is crossed out (the report was reproduced by photo offset), and the now well-known classification of "Unknown" was substituted." ~~~End OTH Excerpt~~~ (If, as Grusch says, there were situations where Reptilians injured and killed humans, and humans defended themselves by killing Reptilians, that throws another major wrinkle into this. If it walks, talks and growls like a Reptilian...) Rogan: "And when this Reptilian craft crashed, the assumption was that it was some sort of conflict?" Grusch: "Correct." Rogan: "Because I would imagine that they’re the ones you’d have to worry about." Grusch: "Correct, because there was dead...uh, dead Grays there, too. So, yeah." Rogan: Oh. So the Grays and the Reptilians were duking it out?" Grusch: "Yeah." Rogan: "Noo." Grusch: "I guess! I guess! You know. You know, I know the people who were there, and..." Rogan: "This sounds fucking insane, David (laughs)." Grusch: "It sounds fucking crazy. And once again, I don’t want to get into too many specifics, because this is a very unique...there’s a couple unique retrievals out there that, to protect the innocent, and people that have risked their f*cking lives. Because a lot of the people that came to me with that kind of information, I mean, they were physically threatened like me and all that. And so, like, me going public was taking it for the team because I was able to create this umbrella of tacit, you know, protection in case somebody got f*cked with. Now, unfortunately, you know, my friend Matt (Sullivan), who knows what happened to him, but, you know, tragically he died, you know, mysteriously, so..." ~ "When people like Matthew Sullivan die in the way he did, unexpectedly, just before he was going to testify, I think that reaches the threshold that you say, 'Yeah, somebody should look at this.'" ~Christopher K. Mellon (And elsewhere in this Rogan interview, Grusch says Sullivan was part of the Legacy UAP program.) ~ Rogan: "Now, these Reptilians, what was their craft like?" Grusch: "Oh, like I said..." Rogan: "The Tic Tac." Grusch: "The Tic Tac stuff." Rogan: "And was their craft crashed into the ground, like broken up?" Grusch: "Yeah, yeah." Rogan: "Okay." Grusch: "It was like wedged into a hill." Rogan: "Like, had it been hit with something?" Grusch: "Um, I don’t remember exactly what happened in that regard, but it did crash, so. And I don’t want to misspeak on what exactly happened, so." (I'm going to go through the Grusch clips I shared in a future YT video.)

Joe Murgia

53,388 görüntüleme • 7 gün önce