Video yükleniyor...

Video Yüklenemedi

Ana Sayfaya Dön

GEN Z IS DITCHING NON-BINARY LABELS... FAST! Turns out that whole “everyone’s non-binary now” thing? Might’ve peaked like TikTok dance trends. At one fancy prep school, Andover, nearly 1 in 10 students said they weren’t male or female in 2023. 2 years later? That number tanked to 3%. Brown...

MarioNawfal's profile picture

Mario Nawfal

3,640,715 subscribers

407,202 görüntüleme • 7 ay önce •via X (Twitter)

Haberler & PolitikaEğitim
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Yorum

Yorum bulunmuyor

Orijinal gönderinin yorumları burada görünecek

Benzer Videolar

Thank you, Ford News for your thread on this child’s brutal death. I’d like to add a couple of points. Their correct name was Nex Benedict. Dagney was their deadname and is still being used in news reports. It’s a damn shame that this is not national news — but even the local news reports are very timid about the fact that this was a brutal beating. Instead, they call it a “school fight”. While incorrectly identifying them as “her”, they conspicuously leave out the fact that Nex was a 16-year-old ‘non-binary’ student. They also don’t mention Superintendent Ryan Walters put out a video in June 2023 calling transgender students “dangerous”, and that they “constitute an attack of truth that jeopardizes the safety of girls.” In January 2024 Walters pushed an emergency rule to prevent students from changing their gender on school files. Ryan Walter’s has put a target on trans and non-binary students backs. The very students he should be protecting as superintendent.
1:48

Thank you, Ford News for your thread on this child’s brutal death. I’d like to add a couple of points. Their correct name was Nex Benedict. Dagney was their deadname and is still being used in news reports. It’s a damn shame that this is not national news — but even the local news reports are very timid about the fact that this was a brutal beating. Instead, they call it a “school fight”. While incorrectly identifying them as “her”, they conspicuously leave out the fact that Nex was a 16-year-old ‘non-binary’ student. They also don’t mention Superintendent Ryan Walters put out a video in June 2023 calling transgender students “dangerous”, and that they “constitute an attack of truth that jeopardizes the safety of girls.” In January 2024 Walters pushed an emergency rule to prevent students from changing their gender on school files. Ryan Walter’s has put a target on trans and non-binary students backs. The very students he should be protecting as superintendent.

Christopher Webb

270,252 görüntüleme • 2 yıl önce

For people who don’t care about gender, they are bringing a lot of attention to it... A THROUPLE are bringing up their two-year-old baby as 'theyby', a term that refers to gender neutral parenting where the baby isn't outwardly identified by its parents as either a boy or a girl. Baby Sparrow follows in the footsetps of their 10-year-old sibling, Hazel, who was initially brought up as a girl but came out themselves as non-binary aged just four. Hazel and Sparrow are looked after by three parent figures: Ari, Gwendolyn and Brynnifer, who themselves are either non-binary and/or transgender. While the family, from Orlando, Florida, lives within a supportive community, online critics have argued it’s no wonder the children are ‘confused’ about their gender. Source: truly (YouTube)
5:04

For people who don’t care about gender, they are bringing a lot of attention to it... A THROUPLE are bringing up their two-year-old baby as 'theyby', a term that refers to gender neutral parenting where the baby isn't outwardly identified by its parents as either a boy or a girl. Baby Sparrow follows in the footsetps of their 10-year-old sibling, Hazel, who was initially brought up as a girl but came out themselves as non-binary aged just four. Hazel and Sparrow are looked after by three parent figures: Ari, Gwendolyn and Brynnifer, who themselves are either non-binary and/or transgender. While the family, from Orlando, Florida, lives within a supportive community, online critics have argued it’s no wonder the children are ‘confused’ about their gender. Source: truly (YouTube)

Camus

38,855 görüntüleme • 10 ay önce

REPORT: The tide has turned. A groundbreaking new study shows the trans and queer identity boom on America’s college campuses is collapsing, down by nearly half since 2023. The share of students identifying as transgender plunged from 7% to under 4%—in just two years. And non-heterosexual identity dropped by about 10 points. Elite schools like Brown and Andover led the reversal, proving that the shift started where the trend was born. Freshmen are now less likely than seniors to identify as trans or queer. The decline is accelerating—fast. And it’s not driven by religion or politics. Researchers say the data points to something bigger—the fading of a cultural trend once fueled by social media and ideology. After years of censorship and conformity, truth and sanity are breaking through. The trans bubble has burst—and it’s not coming back. Watch the full episode:👇
8:13

REPORT: The tide has turned. A groundbreaking new study shows the trans and queer identity boom on America’s college campuses is collapsing, down by nearly half since 2023. The share of students identifying as transgender plunged from 7% to under 4%—in just two years. And non-heterosexual identity dropped by about 10 points. Elite schools like Brown and Andover led the reversal, proving that the shift started where the trend was born. Freshmen are now less likely than seniors to identify as trans or queer. The decline is accelerating—fast. And it’s not driven by religion or politics. Researchers say the data points to something bigger—the fading of a cultural trend once fueled by social media and ideology. After years of censorship and conformity, truth and sanity are breaking through. The trans bubble has burst—and it’s not coming back. Watch the full episode:👇

Vigilant Fox 🦊

85,190 görüntüleme • 9 ay önce

Recently, on Chris Williamson's podcast, said it's "not true" that "there are only two sexes" in humans. He also claimed that "there are people with male brains in female bodies, and conversely." I'd like to address both claims directly to help clear up some confusion. THE SEX BINARY First, Eric used the terms “sex” and “gender” interchangeably, and when prompted to clarify he explicitly claimed sex (as well as gender) was not binary. He brought up people with intersex conditions as the reason why he believes this. But the existence of people with rare intersex conditions does not in any way negate the reality of the sex binary. That’s because the sex binary simply means “there are only two sexes,” and this is true because there are only two types of gametes. Males and females are universally defined by the gametes they have the function to produce, with males producing small gametes (sperm) and females producing large ones (ova). The sex binary does not mean “everyone is either male or female.” This may seem overly pedantic, bit it’s an important distinction. It may be possible that a person can be so sexually ambiguous as to defy categorization as either male or female, but sex ambiguity is not a third sex. The existence and prevalence of complex DSDs or so-called “intersex” conditions is irrelevant to the question of how many sexes there are. So, on this point, Eric is simply confused about what sexes are at a fundamental level. There are only two sexes because there are only two types of gametes—sperm and ova. I agree with Eric that we need to be compassionate and accommodating of people who might be sexually ambiguous. But claiming it’s “no true” that “there are only two sexes’ is definitely not the way to go about this. Apart from being incorrect, it carries a tremendous amount of baggage that I believe Eric and I would both agree must be avoided. BRAIN SEX Lastly, Eric said he believed it’s true that "there are people with male brains in female bodies, and conversely." Again, I believe this is rooted in a fundamental misunderstanding about what sexes are. Simply put, brains do not and cannot have their own sex that differs from the body. Whole organisms have a sex, individual organs do not. However, it is true that various body parts and organs can differ in the degree of how masculinized or feminized they are or appear. Hands are a great example of this, as their morphology is sensitive to in utero testosterone levels. As a result, some females have very masculine looking hands, and some males have very feminine looking hands. But no matter how masculine a female’s hands may be, it would never be correct to say that she has “male hands on a female body.” The same goes for brains and any other organ or appendage. While the brains of males and females can vary in the degree to which they are masculinized or feminized, it is never the case that a person can possess the brain of the opposite sex, even if they deeply feel that way. Eric, I’m a fan of yours and believe you possess tremendous insight on many topics, but I think you need to give this specific topic some more thought. I would be more than happy to chat with you about this if you’re ever interested. I think it's extremely important. Watch the whole podcast at the link below. 🔗
4:12

Recently, on Chris Williamson's podcast, said it's "not true" that "there are only two sexes" in humans. He also claimed that "there are people with male brains in female bodies, and conversely." I'd like to address both claims directly to help clear up some confusion. THE SEX BINARY First, Eric used the terms “sex” and “gender” interchangeably, and when prompted to clarify he explicitly claimed sex (as well as gender) was not binary. He brought up people with intersex conditions as the reason why he believes this. But the existence of people with rare intersex conditions does not in any way negate the reality of the sex binary. That’s because the sex binary simply means “there are only two sexes,” and this is true because there are only two types of gametes. Males and females are universally defined by the gametes they have the function to produce, with males producing small gametes (sperm) and females producing large ones (ova). The sex binary does not mean “everyone is either male or female.” This may seem overly pedantic, bit it’s an important distinction. It may be possible that a person can be so sexually ambiguous as to defy categorization as either male or female, but sex ambiguity is not a third sex. The existence and prevalence of complex DSDs or so-called “intersex” conditions is irrelevant to the question of how many sexes there are. So, on this point, Eric is simply confused about what sexes are at a fundamental level. There are only two sexes because there are only two types of gametes—sperm and ova. I agree with Eric that we need to be compassionate and accommodating of people who might be sexually ambiguous. But claiming it’s “no true” that “there are only two sexes’ is definitely not the way to go about this. Apart from being incorrect, it carries a tremendous amount of baggage that I believe Eric and I would both agree must be avoided. BRAIN SEX Lastly, Eric said he believed it’s true that "there are people with male brains in female bodies, and conversely." Again, I believe this is rooted in a fundamental misunderstanding about what sexes are. Simply put, brains do not and cannot have their own sex that differs from the body. Whole organisms have a sex, individual organs do not. However, it is true that various body parts and organs can differ in the degree of how masculinized or feminized they are or appear. Hands are a great example of this, as their morphology is sensitive to in utero testosterone levels. As a result, some females have very masculine looking hands, and some males have very feminine looking hands. But no matter how masculine a female’s hands may be, it would never be correct to say that she has “male hands on a female body.” The same goes for brains and any other organ or appendage. While the brains of males and females can vary in the degree to which they are masculinized or feminized, it is never the case that a person can possess the brain of the opposite sex, even if they deeply feel that way. Eric, I’m a fan of yours and believe you possess tremendous insight on many topics, but I think you need to give this specific topic some more thought. I would be more than happy to chat with you about this if you’re ever interested. I think it's extremely important. Watch the whole podcast at the link below. 🔗

Colin Wright

1,059,715 görüntüleme • 2 yıl önce

Nightclubs across the U.S. and Europe are shutting down at a swift pace in a stark contrast to the vibrant club scenes that defined the social lives of previous generations. From iconic venues in New York to legendary spots in London and Paris, the decline is undeniable. A 2023 report from the Night Time Industries Association (NTIA) noted that 31% of U.K. nightclubs closed between 2020 and 2023, with similar trends in the U.S., where cities like Los Angeles saw a 20% drop in nightlife venues since 2019 according to Forbes. The reason is that young people, particularly Gen Z and younger Millennials, are simply not going out clubbing like their parents and grandparents did. Cultural shifts and changing social habits have reshaped how young people connect—or don’t. Unlike the 80s and 90s, when nightclubs were the epicenter of socializing, today’s youth are turning away from crowded dance floors. A 2024 survey by YouGov found that only 28% of 18- to 34-year-olds in the U.S. regularly attend nightlife venues, compared to 54% of those over 55 recalling frequent clubbing in their youth. Young people are lonelier than ever, with fewer friends and romantic relationships. A 2021 American Perspectives Survey found that 61% of Gen Z reported serious loneliness, up from 44% in 2010. The average number of close friends has plummeted. 15% of young men and 10% of young women now report having no close friends at all according to a study from 2021 by Survey Center on American Life. Romantic relationships are also declining: 56% of 18- to 30-year-olds were in a relationship in 2020, down from 67% in 2000. Now, with dating apps, remote work, and a culture prioritizing individual comfort over collective revelry, the nightclub’s role is fading. Venues are being replaced by cafes, coworking spaces, or nothing at all. The NTIA warns that without intervention, entire nightlife ecosystems could collapse by 2030. The dance floor is quickly becoming a relic of the past in an ever lonelier world.
0:52

Nightclubs across the U.S. and Europe are shutting down at a swift pace in a stark contrast to the vibrant club scenes that defined the social lives of previous generations. From iconic venues in New York to legendary spots in London and Paris, the decline is undeniable. A 2023 report from the Night Time Industries Association (NTIA) noted that 31% of U.K. nightclubs closed between 2020 and 2023, with similar trends in the U.S., where cities like Los Angeles saw a 20% drop in nightlife venues since 2019 according to Forbes. The reason is that young people, particularly Gen Z and younger Millennials, are simply not going out clubbing like their parents and grandparents did. Cultural shifts and changing social habits have reshaped how young people connect—or don’t. Unlike the 80s and 90s, when nightclubs were the epicenter of socializing, today’s youth are turning away from crowded dance floors. A 2024 survey by YouGov found that only 28% of 18- to 34-year-olds in the U.S. regularly attend nightlife venues, compared to 54% of those over 55 recalling frequent clubbing in their youth. Young people are lonelier than ever, with fewer friends and romantic relationships. A 2021 American Perspectives Survey found that 61% of Gen Z reported serious loneliness, up from 44% in 2010. The average number of close friends has plummeted. 15% of young men and 10% of young women now report having no close friends at all according to a study from 2021 by Survey Center on American Life. Romantic relationships are also declining: 56% of 18- to 30-year-olds were in a relationship in 2020, down from 67% in 2000. Now, with dating apps, remote work, and a culture prioritizing individual comfort over collective revelry, the nightclub’s role is fading. Venues are being replaced by cafes, coworking spaces, or nothing at all. The NTIA warns that without intervention, entire nightlife ecosystems could collapse by 2030. The dance floor is quickly becoming a relic of the past in an ever lonelier world.

Visegrád 24

714,743 görüntüleme • 11 ay önce

Talarico responds to criticism over saying “God is nonbinary”: “If someone’s got a problem with that statement…they should take it up with the Apostle Paul.” No, Mr. Talarico, we’ll take it up with you because you are distorting Scripture and denying God’s self-revelation. 1. Galatians 3:28 is not talking about God’s nature but about those who are “in Christ”—i.e. followers of Christ. The text isn’t denying that some Christians are male and some are female. It’s denying that male and female receive more or less of a heavenly inheritance based on their sex. We are all “one” in Christ no matter what sex we are. But we are nevertheless still either male or female biologically, and we will be male or female for all eternity. 2. “Non-binary” is a fictional category made up by queer theorists to refer to people who don’t identify with either male or female gender identity. While God does not have a body and therefore does not have a biological sex, He reveals His essential nature in masculine terms. “Father” and “Son” properly name the divine essence and are essential to orthodox trinitarian theology. The Bible always refers to Father and Son with masculine pronouns. Sometimes even the Spirit (a term which is grammatically neuter) has masculine pronouns (John 16:13-14). To describe this revelation as “non-binary” is to cast the Deity into a sacrilegious, profane, abominable, queer-theory paradigm that is completely antithetical to Scripture. The most important thoughts a person can have are their thoughts about God, but you are encouraging people to believe in a false god that looks nothing like the God of the Bible.
1:00

Talarico responds to criticism over saying “God is nonbinary”: “If someone’s got a problem with that statement…they should take it up with the Apostle Paul.” No, Mr. Talarico, we’ll take it up with you because you are distorting Scripture and denying God’s self-revelation. 1. Galatians 3:28 is not talking about God’s nature but about those who are “in Christ”—i.e. followers of Christ. The text isn’t denying that some Christians are male and some are female. It’s denying that male and female receive more or less of a heavenly inheritance based on their sex. We are all “one” in Christ no matter what sex we are. But we are nevertheless still either male or female biologically, and we will be male or female for all eternity. 2. “Non-binary” is a fictional category made up by queer theorists to refer to people who don’t identify with either male or female gender identity. While God does not have a body and therefore does not have a biological sex, He reveals His essential nature in masculine terms. “Father” and “Son” properly name the divine essence and are essential to orthodox trinitarian theology. The Bible always refers to Father and Son with masculine pronouns. Sometimes even the Spirit (a term which is grammatically neuter) has masculine pronouns (John 16:13-14). To describe this revelation as “non-binary” is to cast the Deity into a sacrilegious, profane, abominable, queer-theory paradigm that is completely antithetical to Scripture. The most important thoughts a person can have are their thoughts about God, but you are encouraging people to believe in a false god that looks nothing like the God of the Bible.

Denny Burk

45,559 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

“Hooking up with straight men just hits different.” Once a gay boy, then insufferable non binary, now a ‘woman’ (with a stubble), James doesn’t even try to hide it: His motivations come from social status, power, and now - gaining access to “straight” men (who are another type of man lying to themselves.) ‘Ain’t it funny how James ran his mouth for years on how the ‘c*s straight white male patriarchy’ are the source of all society’s ailments, yet can’t wait to jump into bed with one and talk ‘manly stuff?’ In summary: - He is a gay man and gay men like masculinity (even if the community try to claim it’s toxic. Go figure.) - Non binary grew old and he needed more attention and oppressed status again. - Obsessing over his gender for years likely developed some dysphoria. - He is still going for random hookups, which is so typical of gay men; I’m not saying women never do it, but he clearly isn’t even thinking about his safety, which is another example of why he’s not a woman and will never be. - He is still the most insufferable person on the internet for me.
1:14

Sensitive content

“Hooking up with straight men just hits different.” Once a gay boy, then insufferable non binary, now a ‘woman’ (with a stubble), James doesn’t even try to hide it: His motivations come from social status, power, and now - gaining access to “straight” men (who are another type of man lying to themselves.) ‘Ain’t it funny how James ran his mouth for years on how the ‘c*s straight white male patriarchy’ are the source of all society’s ailments, yet can’t wait to jump into bed with one and talk ‘manly stuff?’ In summary: - He is a gay man and gay men like masculinity (even if the community try to claim it’s toxic. Go figure.) - Non binary grew old and he needed more attention and oppressed status again. - Obsessing over his gender for years likely developed some dysphoria. - He is still going for random hookups, which is so typical of gay men; I’m not saying women never do it, but he clearly isn’t even thinking about his safety, which is another example of why he’s not a woman and will never be. - He is still the most insufferable person on the internet for me.

Jack Jewell

603,775 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

This young woman says she’s non-binary. She also thinks 12-year-olds can consent to sex, and shared with us that 10-year-olds were having sex when she was that age. She lies about two years of therapy being needed before children begin puberty blockers. Yes, this is a lie, as evidenced by a news article just this morning in Australia that children were beginning puberty blockers and/or cross-sex hormones without even a single psychiatric assessment. She lies further by saying children are not receiving hormones, and thinks it’s not a big deal that kids are being sterilized because her generation doesn’t want to have children anyway. She ends the conversation by saying we can’t release this footage, threatens to delete it off of my phone herself, and then puts on a fake crying act for some other university students who just arrived and started filming. Having said all that, I wish nothing but the best for this young woman, who has clearly been let down by the authority figures in her life. Gender ideology is not helping.
12:21

This young woman says she’s non-binary. She also thinks 12-year-olds can consent to sex, and shared with us that 10-year-olds were having sex when she was that age. She lies about two years of therapy being needed before children begin puberty blockers. Yes, this is a lie, as evidenced by a news article just this morning in Australia that children were beginning puberty blockers and/or cross-sex hormones without even a single psychiatric assessment. She lies further by saying children are not receiving hormones, and thinks it’s not a big deal that kids are being sterilized because her generation doesn’t want to have children anyway. She ends the conversation by saying we can’t release this footage, threatens to delete it off of my phone herself, and then puts on a fake crying act for some other university students who just arrived and started filming. Having said all that, I wish nothing but the best for this young woman, who has clearly been let down by the authority figures in her life. Gender ideology is not helping.

Billboard Chris 🌎

428,653 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

Thoughts on Preferred Pronouns for #InternationalPronounsDay I don't appreciate someone asking for my preferred pronouns. It's tedious and redundant. 70-90% of our interpersonal communication is non-verbal, and while it may be evident I am biologically male, it's equally evident what I'm going for. Some think 'Asking my pronouns' is a kind gesture or accommodation... It's not. It tells me that you are genuinely unclear of what I am trying to achieve with my transition.... as though you have no idea what signal someone named Julia... with long curly hair, feminine attire, and developed secondary sexual characteristics, could possibly be trying to achieve. This isn't to say that I believe anyone should be *forced* to call me anything in particular. Compelled speech is illiberal and problematic. But people who *ask* for pronoun declarations do so because they've been taught that it's the *polite* thing to do, especially those who strike them as gender non-conforming. It's not polite. It's gaslighting.... "But what about non-binary individuals", someone will inevitably say. "Their gender expression is invisible"... Ignoring the perplexing suggestion that 'a gender expression can be invisible', there's something here I find striking: "So what about non-binary individuals?"... Those who claim non-binary status have chosen an unconventional pathway for themselves that doesn't align with societal norms AND is invisible on the surface. That's fine—the beauty of a free and democratic society is that we allow individuals this sort of liberty. But, non-binary individuals should be better handled as we handle vegans, vegetarians, or others with food allergies or dietary restrictions. Let me explain why. When someone with a food restriction visits a restaurant (or anywhere else for that matter), the onus is on the individual to indicate that they are looking for a particular accommodation. They may ask the server what is included in a particular menu item, or ask for a particular ingredient to be excluded from their meal. The vast majority of restaurants will be happy to accommodate as best as they can, because it's polite to accommodate others needs or desires where we are able. But we would never mandate that the onus is on the restaurant to vet out the allergies or food preferences of each of their guests. We don't create a social expectation that the server's first interaction should be to clarify any and all restrictions of every guest, in the relatively rare event that a particular guest has a special need. We trust that individuals with these needs will raise them—after all they are the experts of their own situation. What if we did this with pronouns. Stopped asking, and allowed people to use whatever pronouns come to the speaker most naturally. If someone has a specific request and is comfortable asking for that accommodation, they can ask. If they don't feel it's important enough to express, perhaps they will accept what's been offered to them. It's by this same logic I sometimes get mushrooms in my casseroles.
0:55

Thoughts on Preferred Pronouns for #InternationalPronounsDay I don't appreciate someone asking for my preferred pronouns. It's tedious and redundant. 70-90% of our interpersonal communication is non-verbal, and while it may be evident I am biologically male, it's equally evident what I'm going for. Some think 'Asking my pronouns' is a kind gesture or accommodation... It's not. It tells me that you are genuinely unclear of what I am trying to achieve with my transition.... as though you have no idea what signal someone named Julia... with long curly hair, feminine attire, and developed secondary sexual characteristics, could possibly be trying to achieve. This isn't to say that I believe anyone should be *forced* to call me anything in particular. Compelled speech is illiberal and problematic. But people who *ask* for pronoun declarations do so because they've been taught that it's the *polite* thing to do, especially those who strike them as gender non-conforming. It's not polite. It's gaslighting.... "But what about non-binary individuals", someone will inevitably say. "Their gender expression is invisible"... Ignoring the perplexing suggestion that 'a gender expression can be invisible', there's something here I find striking: "So what about non-binary individuals?"... Those who claim non-binary status have chosen an unconventional pathway for themselves that doesn't align with societal norms AND is invisible on the surface. That's fine—the beauty of a free and democratic society is that we allow individuals this sort of liberty. But, non-binary individuals should be better handled as we handle vegans, vegetarians, or others with food allergies or dietary restrictions. Let me explain why. When someone with a food restriction visits a restaurant (or anywhere else for that matter), the onus is on the individual to indicate that they are looking for a particular accommodation. They may ask the server what is included in a particular menu item, or ask for a particular ingredient to be excluded from their meal. The vast majority of restaurants will be happy to accommodate as best as they can, because it's polite to accommodate others needs or desires where we are able. But we would never mandate that the onus is on the restaurant to vet out the allergies or food preferences of each of their guests. We don't create a social expectation that the server's first interaction should be to clarify any and all restrictions of every guest, in the relatively rare event that a particular guest has a special need. We trust that individuals with these needs will raise them—after all they are the experts of their own situation. What if we did this with pronouns. Stopped asking, and allowed people to use whatever pronouns come to the speaker most naturally. If someone has a specific request and is comfortable asking for that accommodation, they can ask. If they don't feel it's important enough to express, perhaps they will accept what's been offered to them. It's by this same logic I sometimes get mushrooms in my casseroles.

Julia Malott

29,868 görüntüleme • 2 yıl önce

Parents are paying Brown University over $75,000 a year, yet we are learning the school has almost zero usable surveillance footage of the recent shooting because they allegedly turned their cameras off to protect Palestinian students and illegal aliens from being reported. Reports indicate a homeless man was able to access the building where the shooting took place, and Fox News confirmed the shooter walked right out of a convenient "blind spot” where there were no cameras. Brown is also frantically scrubbing pro-Hamas radical Mustapha Kharbouch from their website because his presence suggests they are in DIRECT VIOLATION of their July settlement with President Trump to stop antisemitism on college campuses. It appears that Brown cares more about hiding their non-compliance to save their $8 billion endowment than they care about actual campus security, and now 2 Brown University students and an MIT professor are dead!
4:33

Parents are paying Brown University over $75,000 a year, yet we are learning the school has almost zero usable surveillance footage of the recent shooting because they allegedly turned their cameras off to protect Palestinian students and illegal aliens from being reported. Reports indicate a homeless man was able to access the building where the shooting took place, and Fox News confirmed the shooter walked right out of a convenient "blind spot” where there were no cameras. Brown is also frantically scrubbing pro-Hamas radical Mustapha Kharbouch from their website because his presence suggests they are in DIRECT VIOLATION of their July settlement with President Trump to stop antisemitism on college campuses. It appears that Brown cares more about hiding their non-compliance to save their $8 billion endowment than they care about actual campus security, and now 2 Brown University students and an MIT professor are dead!

Laura Loomer

60,603 görüntüleme • 7 ay önce

The biggest injustice in Canada: The corrupt Liberal industrial complex that takes your taxpayer funds, And allocates it to lawyers, consultants & fake Indigenous businesses rather than helping First Nations people themselves. If you didn’t know, it was the Conservatives that formally apologized for residential schools. Liberals, on the other hand, while Chrétien was the Minister of Indigenous Affairs, knew there was a problem. He could have taken action & didn’t. The Conservatives, under Harper & while Poilievre was a part of the administration, went on to implement the First Nations Financial Transparency Act. The Liberals, under Trudeau, stopped enforcing it. Carney still won’t enforce it. Fast forward to today, nearly 40% of First Nations Bands are non-compliant with reporting. Please note: These are the Chiefs & those in charge, and not the individual First Nations themselves. It got so bad that an individual of a First Nations band, had to sue in order to get the financial information that should’ve been provided by the transparency act in the first place. And now, it turns out that from 2020 to 2025, nearly 2000 businesses were removed from the indigenous directory that allows them to have access to federal contracts. These businesses were awarded nearly $300 million. As an example, did you know that in Alberta, the life expectancy of a First Nations individual is nearly 20 years less than a non-indigenous person. It’s similar across Canada: the life expectancy of First Nations is significantly lower than non-Indigenous people AND CONTINUES TO DECLINE. The Liberals created an industrial complex, where the beneficiaries are everyone except for the First Nations individuals themselves. We are now at nearly $32 billion per year in funding indigenous related services & initiatives. The questions we have to ask is: -Where is the money going? -If we don’t have transparency, then how can we ensure it’s going to those in need? -Why don’t the Liberals enforce the financial transparency act? -And why, after nearly a quarter of $1 trillion spent on Indigenous related matters, is their life expectancy going down? A true nation-building project, would be helping and uplifting First Nations and that starts with transparency and accountability. The Liberals have shown they are interested in an industrial complex that creates dependency, early death & corruption. It makes zero sense. It’s insane.
5:57

The biggest injustice in Canada: The corrupt Liberal industrial complex that takes your taxpayer funds, And allocates it to lawyers, consultants & fake Indigenous businesses rather than helping First Nations people themselves. If you didn’t know, it was the Conservatives that formally apologized for residential schools. Liberals, on the other hand, while Chrétien was the Minister of Indigenous Affairs, knew there was a problem. He could have taken action & didn’t. The Conservatives, under Harper & while Poilievre was a part of the administration, went on to implement the First Nations Financial Transparency Act. The Liberals, under Trudeau, stopped enforcing it. Carney still won’t enforce it. Fast forward to today, nearly 40% of First Nations Bands are non-compliant with reporting. Please note: These are the Chiefs & those in charge, and not the individual First Nations themselves. It got so bad that an individual of a First Nations band, had to sue in order to get the financial information that should’ve been provided by the transparency act in the first place. And now, it turns out that from 2020 to 2025, nearly 2000 businesses were removed from the indigenous directory that allows them to have access to federal contracts. These businesses were awarded nearly $300 million. As an example, did you know that in Alberta, the life expectancy of a First Nations individual is nearly 20 years less than a non-indigenous person. It’s similar across Canada: the life expectancy of First Nations is significantly lower than non-Indigenous people AND CONTINUES TO DECLINE. The Liberals created an industrial complex, where the beneficiaries are everyone except for the First Nations individuals themselves. We are now at nearly $32 billion per year in funding indigenous related services & initiatives. The questions we have to ask is: -Where is the money going? -If we don’t have transparency, then how can we ensure it’s going to those in need? -Why don’t the Liberals enforce the financial transparency act? -And why, after nearly a quarter of $1 trillion spent on Indigenous related matters, is their life expectancy going down? A true nation-building project, would be helping and uplifting First Nations and that starts with transparency and accountability. The Liberals have shown they are interested in an industrial complex that creates dependency, early death & corruption. It makes zero sense. It’s insane.

Mario Zelaya

11,120 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce

Proof the Left is brainwashing kids into becoming transgender Joe Rogan talks about how when Elon Musk bought Twitter, kids identifying as trans completely fell off “That chart that shows young kids, teenagers identifying as trans and non-binary. Literally stops dead when you bought Twitter and starts falling off a cliff when people are allowed to have rational discussions” “The reason for acquiring Twitter is because it was causing destruction at a civilizational level. I tweeted at the time that it was Wormtongue for the world—like Wormtongue from Lord of the Rings, who would whisper terrible things to the king so the king would believe things that weren’t true. Unfortunately, Twitter had been controlled by the woke mob. They were pushing a nihilistic, anti-civilizational mind virus to the world — You mentioned the massive spike in kids identifying as trans and then that spike dropping after the Twitter acquisition. I think simply allowing the truth to be told was key. Sunlight is the best disinfectant, as they say.”
1:44

Proof the Left is brainwashing kids into becoming transgender Joe Rogan talks about how when Elon Musk bought Twitter, kids identifying as trans completely fell off “That chart that shows young kids, teenagers identifying as trans and non-binary. Literally stops dead when you bought Twitter and starts falling off a cliff when people are allowed to have rational discussions” “The reason for acquiring Twitter is because it was causing destruction at a civilizational level. I tweeted at the time that it was Wormtongue for the world—like Wormtongue from Lord of the Rings, who would whisper terrible things to the king so the king would believe things that weren’t true. Unfortunately, Twitter had been controlled by the woke mob. They were pushing a nihilistic, anti-civilizational mind virus to the world — You mentioned the massive spike in kids identifying as trans and then that spike dropping after the Twitter acquisition. I think simply allowing the truth to be told was key. Sunlight is the best disinfectant, as they say.”

Wall Street Apes

48,716 görüntüleme • 8 ay önce

RFK Jr. just told Tucker Carlson that 2.7% of vaccines given — 1 in every 37 doses — may cause injury. The CDC buried the study that uncovered it. “The problem with VAERS is that it’s voluntary.” “It takes a doctor a half an hour to fill out the paperwork, so there’s a big incentive for them not to do it.” “There’s no course on vaccine injury in any medical school in this country.” “In 2010, CDC designed a new system, and it was a machine counting system.” “They designed a machine counting system that would do essentially a cluster analysis.” “It was a team led by a guy called Lazarus.” “And CDC paid for the whole thing, millions of dollars, and it was a long term study.” “They compared what the machine counting system had gotten and compared that to what VAERS had collected during the same period.” “VAERS was capturing fewer than 1% of vaccine injuries.” “The data showed injuries in about 2.7% of vaccines.” “Which is 1/37 vaccines you get, there’s an injury.” “CDC saw that and said we’re not going to use the system.” “They shelved it in 2010, and they’ve continued to use VAERS when they know that it doesn’t work.” “It was designed to fail.” “We’re going to create either within VAERS or, supplementary to VAERS, a system that actually works.”
3:41

RFK Jr. just told Tucker Carlson that 2.7% of vaccines given — 1 in every 37 doses — may cause injury. The CDC buried the study that uncovered it. “The problem with VAERS is that it’s voluntary.” “It takes a doctor a half an hour to fill out the paperwork, so there’s a big incentive for them not to do it.” “There’s no course on vaccine injury in any medical school in this country.” “In 2010, CDC designed a new system, and it was a machine counting system.” “They designed a machine counting system that would do essentially a cluster analysis.” “It was a team led by a guy called Lazarus.” “And CDC paid for the whole thing, millions of dollars, and it was a long term study.” “They compared what the machine counting system had gotten and compared that to what VAERS had collected during the same period.” “VAERS was capturing fewer than 1% of vaccine injuries.” “The data showed injuries in about 2.7% of vaccines.” “Which is 1/37 vaccines you get, there’s an injury.” “CDC saw that and said we’re not going to use the system.” “They shelved it in 2010, and they’ve continued to use VAERS when they know that it doesn’t work.” “It was designed to fail.” “We’re going to create either within VAERS or, supplementary to VAERS, a system that actually works.”

End Tribalism in Politics

171,946 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

Democrats are in full meltdown mode as their party gets hijacked by the far-left crazies. Over 60% of their primaries, moderate establishment types are getting absolutely smoked by hardcore socialists and radicals. Bernie Sanders staffers winning in New Jersey, Chris Rob types in Pennsylvania and Michigan, Graham Platner in Maine, and that James Talarico clown in Texas, the one who says God is non-binary. They try to sell these people as “normal” a humble Texas pastor or a Maine oyster farmer. Give me a break. It’s all a sham. Their real record is pure progressive extremism. A new poll shows 53% of their own voters and nearly two-thirds of independents are fed up with the direction of the party. The tail is wagging the dog, and normal Democrats are watching their party sprint off a cliff. This is what happens when you let the lunatics run the asylum. Americans aren’t buying the act anymore.
1:58

Democrats are in full meltdown mode as their party gets hijacked by the far-left crazies. Over 60% of their primaries, moderate establishment types are getting absolutely smoked by hardcore socialists and radicals. Bernie Sanders staffers winning in New Jersey, Chris Rob types in Pennsylvania and Michigan, Graham Platner in Maine, and that James Talarico clown in Texas, the one who says God is non-binary. They try to sell these people as “normal” a humble Texas pastor or a Maine oyster farmer. Give me a break. It’s all a sham. Their real record is pure progressive extremism. A new poll shows 53% of their own voters and nearly two-thirds of independents are fed up with the direction of the party. The tail is wagging the dog, and normal Democrats are watching their party sprint off a cliff. This is what happens when you let the lunatics run the asylum. Americans aren’t buying the act anymore.

Gunther Eagleman™

393,933 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

👽 Did Grusch See Footage of Live Aliens? 👽 "Grusch has seen evidence that will leave you slack-jawed when you hear it." ~JF 😶 What Left Congress Speechless, and Staffers with Their Eyes Popping Out of Their Heads? 😱 ~ "Examine biological evidence of living or deceased non-human intelligence." ~Burlison Proposed Legislation (I'm gonna break all of this down and give you my speculation on what left Fox with his jaw on the floor, members of Congress speechless, and their senior staffers with their eyes popping out of their heads.) ~ @jamescfox: " Probably about two weeks ago (late May), we were having meetings on The Hill with members of Congress. We brought in a PR firm, 42 West, and we were having a meeting with staff members, bipartisan. We had Rep. Anna Paulina Luna, Rep. Tim Burchett Press Office, Rep. Eric Burlison. We had a representative from Congressman Jared Moskowitz's office. We had a number of Chiefs of Staff (top staffer for a specific member of Congress), like, present." (Don't really know why they needed a public relations firm in attendance, but if it helps them with advice on how to handle this, so be it. Just know: it appears like members of that PR firm know what Grusch said, and we don't.) Fox: "And, I can't reveal what was said. I thought it was gonna be said at the actual event that we had yesterday (June 9th) in DC with Mr. Grusch." (Don't be mad at Fox for keeping his word to Grusch and not sharing what was said in that private meeting. But I don't blame people for being annoyed that Grusch shared this information six or so weeks ago and we still don't know what he said in that room.) Fox: "Then, what Mr. Grusch revealed to all of us, what he had seen with his own eyes, left the room speechless. It drew the oxygen out of the room. I looked at everybody in that room, and their eyeballs were popping out. My jaw was on the floor. Like, I simply couldn't believe what he'd seen with his own eyes. Like, I can't wait for it to come out. "So I asked Mr. Grusch today, 'Can I talk about what I heard?' And he's like, 'No, but I will be addressing it very soon.'" (Like I said, it's almost been one month now (June 12) since Fox said this, so what does "very soon" mean? Was Grusch supposed to share this information on CNN with Jake Tapper last week but it didn't happen because that interview was, reportedly (Fox told us), postponed?) Fox: "So that's where we stand right now. But I can tell you, Mr. Grusch has seen evidence that will leave you slack-jawed when you hear it. It's coming, it's coming." (We heard that Gruch's Op/Ed was coming soon and that was 2.5 years ago. It never happened. So, I don't blame people for being skeptical about this. If Grusch hasn't told us by this time next week, I propose someone (a member of Congress) who was in that room just tell us. That's fair, right? Total transparency from our elected representatives?) ~ Fox: "Mr. Grusch is legitimately concerned about his personal safety. He's coming out with it, I promise you, this is coming out. He assured me today that he will address this issue to the general public very soon, in the near future." (I'm glad Grusch told a room full of people what he saw, as that may offer him some protection from people who allegedly want him to stop talking.) Fox: "So I can't speak to what he's gonna say, but I'm just telling you from what I heard out of his mouth, sitting in an office of a member of Congress? And everybody (Fox laughs) in the room, you could have heard a pin drop." Clayton Morris: "Could you give us a hint? Is it related to craft? Can you maybe dance around it a little bit? I want to say, 'You're killing me, Smalls (laughs).'" Fox: "Yeah, so if you can imagine, if you know about 'Moment of Contact,' that involves captured non-human intelligent beings. Think about that for a minute. Think about that case. I heard it out of his mouth, and I can tell you, I was in the room. And I looked around the room, and I'm looking at these young, like, guys in their 20s, you know, the staff guys? And their eyeballs were popping out of their head. My jaw was on the floor. I couldn't believe it." (There's a reason why I included that quote (living or deceased non-human intelligence) from the new Burlison/Carson/Crane legislation at the top of this tweet: At the very least, I'm confident Grusch told them that he saw photos of dead non-human beings. Bodies. But what about evidence of LIVING non-humans, aka aliens of unknown origin? More on that at the end. Fox: "My jaw was on the floor. I couldn't believe it." (Would Grusch saying he saw photos of craft and dead non-humans have that type of effect on Fox? Seems like that's something he would have expected to hear.) ~ Fox: "It was an [out of] body experience when I heard that. But I can tell you...the impression I got, was that he felt a little more protected to talk about this because of President Trump's directive to release the files, and that this... Again, this is my speculation, okay? This is not what Mr. Grusch said. "I got the impression that he was much more relaxed - even though he was still not fully relaxed - because of President Trump's directive to release these files. And that it was something that he had seen during his official investigations just within the last few years." (Imagine how much more relaxed Grusch (and others) would feel if we had an actual Executive Order from Trump with strong language to protect whistleblowers?) Fox: "And that it...I think it had an extremely profound impact on his life when he saw this evidence that he described. Again I'm leaving it right there. I've been talking with Republicans, and they said if Joe Rogan tweets about this, that the President will hear it, And I can't overstate the significance of that." (Why hasn't Rogan already done that? No excuse. Fox has been on Rogan and I'm sure he has Joe's contact information. Make it happen.) Fox: "We need people. We're not asking for money, we're not asking to get on your show, we're just asking, Mr. President, please, as many people as possible, release the files that should not be associated with national security. And that's the alien or non-human sentient beings. That's it." ~~~ (I'm going to speculate on what Grusch may have said in that room.) Fox: "I think it had an extremely profound impact on [Grusch's] life when he saw this evidence that he described." (Grusch has said he started out as a skeptic when he started looking into this. If he was shown what he felt were photos of non-human bodies, I think that might be enough to have an, "extremely profound impact on his life." Depending on exactly what those photos showed, of course.) In "Moment of Contact," Eric Davis had this exchange with Fox: @jamescfox: "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. That took it to a higher level, that kicked it up several notches of reality. And that made it very clear that this reality is very hard, very physical, very real. "And this type of evidence, you can't come by in the open literature, it's not public, it's classified. And I can't discuss what it was, but 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." Fox: "You swear on your life that you saw those pictures?" Davis: "Oh, I swear on my life, and everybody's...my children's life, so (laughs). Yeah, I'm absolutely telling you the truth. I saw the evidence, and it's stark! I can't tell you the exact number, because it's classified, but I'll just say, there's a few dozen total retrievals." Full exchange with video... ~~~ As I said in my other post, I think Davis, Semivan, Puthoff, Kelleher, Grusch, Lacatski, Stratton, aka The AAWSAP Gang (I just made that up), may have seen the same evidence of photos and reports. Has Grusch seen more than that? I don't know. In 2025, Davis said this... Burlison: "Can you comment on whatever species have been piloting these craft? Are they largish? Are they multiple species? What was their size, and how many are usually on a craft?" Davis: "They're typically the multiple species people are familiar with. The Greys, the Nordics. People have talked about Reptilians and Insectoids. It's not that they're Reptilian or Insectoid, it's that they resemble, to the participant, a reptile, or insect type. A humanoid, because they have this...a hand, and four limbs, and a torso, so..." Burlison: "Large? Small?" Davis: "Human size, human scale." Burlison: "How many are in a crew?" Davis: "Well, the group, well, the Greys I'm familiar with from investigating the crash at Corona, which is misnamed the crash at Roswell. It's not the crash at Roswell, it's the crash at Corona, New Mexico. Those were Greys, those were four-foot tall. And the Nordics are typically human-sized, probably...I've heard five, six-feet tall. And same with the people who mislabel Reptilian and Insectoid. They're roughly that height, too. I haven't heard anything about anything seven or eight feet or nine-foot tall, of that nature." Full post with video... ~ And this past Sunday, Davis said this to The Good Trouble Show with Matt Ford... Davis: "I can say to you guys that there are a minimum of four different alien species. The credibility of that ranges on the spectrum from no credibility to high credibility. The high credibility is the classified part." Full post: My Final Thoughts (Based on everything Davis has shared, it seems he saw classified photos of what appeared to him to be non-human craft and photos that appeared to show dead non-humans (bodies) with enough detail that he could see that some resembled reptiles and others resembled insects. Were there also photos of Greys and beings that looked human (Nordic)? I don't know. These images of non-humans would fall into what Davis deemed "high credibility" and "the classified part.") Davis: "I saw the evidence, and it's stark!" (If Davis saw close-up photos that showed details of beings that looked like Reptilians and Mantids, I'd say that qualifies as stark!) Back to what Fox said... Fox: "Then, what Mr. Grusch revealed to all of us, what he had seen with his own eyes, left the room speechless. It drew the oxygen out of the room. I looked at everybody in that room, and their eyeballs were popping out. My jaw was on the floor. Like, I simply couldn't believe what he'd seen with his own eyes." (I think what caused that reaction was Grusch describing seeing close-up photos of different types of non-human beings. Maybe.) However, Fox also said this: "...if you can imagine, if you know about 'Moment of Contact,' that involves captured non-human intelligent beings (This is the Varginha, Brazil case. ~Joe). Think about that for a minute. Think about that case. I heard it out of his mouth, and I can tell you, I was in the room." (The biggest CLAIM in that film and from that case is that a live, non-human being was captured and that Dr. Italo saw video of it, and then stood next to it for a few minutes when it was in the hospital, in a bed, being cared for by another doctor. Did Grusch say he saw evidence (photos or videos) of a live being that appeared to be non-human? Joe Rogan asked him that in his November 2023 interview... Grusch: "Once you realize the phenomenon's real, then you realize we've recovered artifacts and, you know, biologics or, you know, dead pilots, if you will, even though it's kind of creepy to think about in your world view. You don't think they were ever, you know, alive sometimes, too, right? And I'll leave it at that, only because, you know, that is something the President and his cabinet need to disclose this in a controlled manner." (He was either hinting that he's seen them alive or that them being alive and on this planet is a huge deal and not his responsibility to announce. I think it's the latter.) Rogan: "Are there discussions of interactions with live beings?" Grusch: "Uhh, there was some water-cooler talk about that kind of thing." Rogan: "But that's it?" Grusch: "But, you know, I don't even wanna get into it because it's like, uh, there was some details provided to me but it's like, it's secondary and I don't know if that's like, the telephone game and I don't know if it was hyperbolized in any way...um, you know, in the break room, so to speak. So I just... I'm so anal about making sure what I say is accurate...I don't, you know, I don't know." (Based on what he said there, it seems like he has NOT seen any evidence of live beings. If he now comes out and says that he has, it will seem like a flip flop. So, I'm gonna go with Grusch said he saw photos of non-human bodies and they were of the different types/species that Dr. Eric Davis referenced. One more flashback to what Davis said in that public, congressional briefing in May of 2025.) Davis: "It's not that they're Reptilian or Insectoid, it's that they resemble, to the participant, a reptile, or insect type." (That sounds like someone who has seen exactly what they look like, via photos.) Final point... "Examine biological evidence of living or deceased non-human intelligence." ~Burlison Proposed Legislation (That language was in the original UAPD Disclosure Act co-sponsored by Senators Schumer and Rounds, and four other senators. Why put that language in there if you haven't heard credible reports of living or deceased (bodies) non-human intelligence? Are there stories of living, non-humans on this planet? Yes, and I'll leave you with one of them.) ) (Just to make it clear: I think Grusch will say that he saw clear photos of different types of non-human bodies and some looked like reptiles and others looked like insects. It would be amazing to hear Grusch say he saw video or film of living beings, but I don't expect that. However...this still bothers me... Would Grusch describing seeing photos of craft and different kinds of dead aliens leave veteran-of-the-UFO-field, James Fox, with his jaw on the floor? I guess we're gonna see. And hopefully soon.)
4:25

👽 Did Grusch See Footage of Live Aliens? 👽 "Grusch has seen evidence that will leave you slack-jawed when you hear it." ~JF 😶 What Left Congress Speechless, and Staffers with Their Eyes Popping Out of Their Heads? 😱 ~ "Examine biological evidence of living or deceased non-human intelligence." ~Burlison Proposed Legislation (I'm gonna break all of this down and give you my speculation on what left Fox with his jaw on the floor, members of Congress speechless, and their senior staffers with their eyes popping out of their heads.) ~ @jamescfox: " Probably about two weeks ago (late May), we were having meetings on The Hill with members of Congress. We brought in a PR firm, 42 West, and we were having a meeting with staff members, bipartisan. We had Rep. Anna Paulina Luna, Rep. Tim Burchett Press Office, Rep. Eric Burlison. We had a representative from Congressman Jared Moskowitz's office. We had a number of Chiefs of Staff (top staffer for a specific member of Congress), like, present." (Don't really know why they needed a public relations firm in attendance, but if it helps them with advice on how to handle this, so be it. Just know: it appears like members of that PR firm know what Grusch said, and we don't.) Fox: "And, I can't reveal what was said. I thought it was gonna be said at the actual event that we had yesterday (June 9th) in DC with Mr. Grusch." (Don't be mad at Fox for keeping his word to Grusch and not sharing what was said in that private meeting. But I don't blame people for being annoyed that Grusch shared this information six or so weeks ago and we still don't know what he said in that room.) Fox: "Then, what Mr. Grusch revealed to all of us, what he had seen with his own eyes, left the room speechless. It drew the oxygen out of the room. I looked at everybody in that room, and their eyeballs were popping out. My jaw was on the floor. Like, I simply couldn't believe what he'd seen with his own eyes. Like, I can't wait for it to come out. "So I asked Mr. Grusch today, 'Can I talk about what I heard?' And he's like, 'No, but I will be addressing it very soon.'" (Like I said, it's almost been one month now (June 12) since Fox said this, so what does "very soon" mean? Was Grusch supposed to share this information on CNN with Jake Tapper last week but it didn't happen because that interview was, reportedly (Fox told us), postponed?) Fox: "So that's where we stand right now. But I can tell you, Mr. Grusch has seen evidence that will leave you slack-jawed when you hear it. It's coming, it's coming." (We heard that Gruch's Op/Ed was coming soon and that was 2.5 years ago. It never happened. So, I don't blame people for being skeptical about this. If Grusch hasn't told us by this time next week, I propose someone (a member of Congress) who was in that room just tell us. That's fair, right? Total transparency from our elected representatives?) ~ Fox: "Mr. Grusch is legitimately concerned about his personal safety. He's coming out with it, I promise you, this is coming out. He assured me today that he will address this issue to the general public very soon, in the near future." (I'm glad Grusch told a room full of people what he saw, as that may offer him some protection from people who allegedly want him to stop talking.) Fox: "So I can't speak to what he's gonna say, but I'm just telling you from what I heard out of his mouth, sitting in an office of a member of Congress? And everybody (Fox laughs) in the room, you could have heard a pin drop." Clayton Morris: "Could you give us a hint? Is it related to craft? Can you maybe dance around it a little bit? I want to say, 'You're killing me, Smalls (laughs).'" Fox: "Yeah, so if you can imagine, if you know about 'Moment of Contact,' that involves captured non-human intelligent beings. Think about that for a minute. Think about that case. I heard it out of his mouth, and I can tell you, I was in the room. And I looked around the room, and I'm looking at these young, like, guys in their 20s, you know, the staff guys? And their eyeballs were popping out of their head. My jaw was on the floor. I couldn't believe it." (There's a reason why I included that quote (living or deceased non-human intelligence) from the new Burlison/Carson/Crane legislation at the top of this tweet: At the very least, I'm confident Grusch told them that he saw photos of dead non-human beings. Bodies. But what about evidence of LIVING non-humans, aka aliens of unknown origin? More on that at the end. Fox: "My jaw was on the floor. I couldn't believe it." (Would Grusch saying he saw photos of craft and dead non-humans have that type of effect on Fox? Seems like that's something he would have expected to hear.) ~ Fox: "It was an [out of] body experience when I heard that. But I can tell you...the impression I got, was that he felt a little more protected to talk about this because of President Trump's directive to release the files, and that this... Again, this is my speculation, okay? This is not what Mr. Grusch said. "I got the impression that he was much more relaxed - even though he was still not fully relaxed - because of President Trump's directive to release these files. And that it was something that he had seen during his official investigations just within the last few years." (Imagine how much more relaxed Grusch (and others) would feel if we had an actual Executive Order from Trump with strong language to protect whistleblowers?) Fox: "And that it...I think it had an extremely profound impact on his life when he saw this evidence that he described. Again I'm leaving it right there. I've been talking with Republicans, and they said if Joe Rogan tweets about this, that the President will hear it, And I can't overstate the significance of that." (Why hasn't Rogan already done that? No excuse. Fox has been on Rogan and I'm sure he has Joe's contact information. Make it happen.) Fox: "We need people. We're not asking for money, we're not asking to get on your show, we're just asking, Mr. President, please, as many people as possible, release the files that should not be associated with national security. And that's the alien or non-human sentient beings. That's it." ~~~ (I'm going to speculate on what Grusch may have said in that room.) Fox: "I think it had an extremely profound impact on [Grusch's] life when he saw this evidence that he described." (Grusch has said he started out as a skeptic when he started looking into this. If he was shown what he felt were photos of non-human bodies, I think that might be enough to have an, "extremely profound impact on his life." Depending on exactly what those photos showed, of course.) In "Moment of Contact," Eric Davis had this exchange with Fox: @jamescfox: "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. That took it to a higher level, that kicked it up several notches of reality. And that made it very clear that this reality is very hard, very physical, very real. "And this type of evidence, you can't come by in the open literature, it's not public, it's classified. And I can't discuss what it was, but 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." Fox: "You swear on your life that you saw those pictures?" Davis: "Oh, I swear on my life, and everybody's...my children's life, so (laughs). Yeah, I'm absolutely telling you the truth. I saw the evidence, and it's stark! I can't tell you the exact number, because it's classified, but I'll just say, there's a few dozen total retrievals." Full exchange with video... ~~~ As I said in my other post, I think Davis, Semivan, Puthoff, Kelleher, Grusch, Lacatski, Stratton, aka The AAWSAP Gang (I just made that up), may have seen the same evidence of photos and reports. Has Grusch seen more than that? I don't know. In 2025, Davis said this... Burlison: "Can you comment on whatever species have been piloting these craft? Are they largish? Are they multiple species? What was their size, and how many are usually on a craft?" Davis: "They're typically the multiple species people are familiar with. The Greys, the Nordics. People have talked about Reptilians and Insectoids. It's not that they're Reptilian or Insectoid, it's that they resemble, to the participant, a reptile, or insect type. A humanoid, because they have this...a hand, and four limbs, and a torso, so..." Burlison: "Large? Small?" Davis: "Human size, human scale." Burlison: "How many are in a crew?" Davis: "Well, the group, well, the Greys I'm familiar with from investigating the crash at Corona, which is misnamed the crash at Roswell. It's not the crash at Roswell, it's the crash at Corona, New Mexico. Those were Greys, those were four-foot tall. And the Nordics are typically human-sized, probably...I've heard five, six-feet tall. And same with the people who mislabel Reptilian and Insectoid. They're roughly that height, too. I haven't heard anything about anything seven or eight feet or nine-foot tall, of that nature." Full post with video... ~ And this past Sunday, Davis said this to The Good Trouble Show with Matt Ford... Davis: "I can say to you guys that there are a minimum of four different alien species. The credibility of that ranges on the spectrum from no credibility to high credibility. The high credibility is the classified part." Full post: My Final Thoughts (Based on everything Davis has shared, it seems he saw classified photos of what appeared to him to be non-human craft and photos that appeared to show dead non-humans (bodies) with enough detail that he could see that some resembled reptiles and others resembled insects. Were there also photos of Greys and beings that looked human (Nordic)? I don't know. These images of non-humans would fall into what Davis deemed "high credibility" and "the classified part.") Davis: "I saw the evidence, and it's stark!" (If Davis saw close-up photos that showed details of beings that looked like Reptilians and Mantids, I'd say that qualifies as stark!) Back to what Fox said... Fox: "Then, what Mr. Grusch revealed to all of us, what he had seen with his own eyes, left the room speechless. It drew the oxygen out of the room. I looked at everybody in that room, and their eyeballs were popping out. My jaw was on the floor. Like, I simply couldn't believe what he'd seen with his own eyes." (I think what caused that reaction was Grusch describing seeing close-up photos of different types of non-human beings. Maybe.) However, Fox also said this: "...if you can imagine, if you know about 'Moment of Contact,' that involves captured non-human intelligent beings (This is the Varginha, Brazil case. ~Joe). Think about that for a minute. Think about that case. I heard it out of his mouth, and I can tell you, I was in the room." (The biggest CLAIM in that film and from that case is that a live, non-human being was captured and that Dr. Italo saw video of it, and then stood next to it for a few minutes when it was in the hospital, in a bed, being cared for by another doctor. Did Grusch say he saw evidence (photos or videos) of a live being that appeared to be non-human? Joe Rogan asked him that in his November 2023 interview... Grusch: "Once you realize the phenomenon's real, then you realize we've recovered artifacts and, you know, biologics or, you know, dead pilots, if you will, even though it's kind of creepy to think about in your world view. You don't think they were ever, you know, alive sometimes, too, right? And I'll leave it at that, only because, you know, that is something the President and his cabinet need to disclose this in a controlled manner." (He was either hinting that he's seen them alive or that them being alive and on this planet is a huge deal and not his responsibility to announce. I think it's the latter.) Rogan: "Are there discussions of interactions with live beings?" Grusch: "Uhh, there was some water-cooler talk about that kind of thing." Rogan: "But that's it?" Grusch: "But, you know, I don't even wanna get into it because it's like, uh, there was some details provided to me but it's like, it's secondary and I don't know if that's like, the telephone game and I don't know if it was hyperbolized in any way...um, you know, in the break room, so to speak. So I just... I'm so anal about making sure what I say is accurate...I don't, you know, I don't know." (Based on what he said there, it seems like he has NOT seen any evidence of live beings. If he now comes out and says that he has, it will seem like a flip flop. So, I'm gonna go with Grusch said he saw photos of non-human bodies and they were of the different types/species that Dr. Eric Davis referenced. One more flashback to what Davis said in that public, congressional briefing in May of 2025.) Davis: "It's not that they're Reptilian or Insectoid, it's that they resemble, to the participant, a reptile, or insect type." (That sounds like someone who has seen exactly what they look like, via photos.) Final point... "Examine biological evidence of living or deceased non-human intelligence." ~Burlison Proposed Legislation (That language was in the original UAPD Disclosure Act co-sponsored by Senators Schumer and Rounds, and four other senators. Why put that language in there if you haven't heard credible reports of living or deceased (bodies) non-human intelligence? Are there stories of living, non-humans on this planet? Yes, and I'll leave you with one of them.) ) (Just to make it clear: I think Grusch will say that he saw clear photos of different types of non-human bodies and some looked like reptiles and others looked like insects. It would be amazing to hear Grusch say he saw video or film of living beings, but I don't expect that. However...this still bothers me... Would Grusch describing seeing photos of craft and different kinds of dead aliens leave veteran-of-the-UFO-field, James Fox, with his jaw on the floor? I guess we're gonna see. And hopefully soon.)

Joe Murgia

167,602 görüntüleme • 10 gün önce

Malcolm Gladwell revealed why you shouldn't go to Harvard: 1. America does not have a shortage of students who want science and math degrees. It has a shortage of students who finish them. Half of all high school seniors who intend to study STEM drop out by the end of their second year. The problem is not interest. It is persistence. 2. The obvious assumption is that smarter students persist longer. So Gladwell tested it. At Hartwick College, a small liberal arts school in New York, the top third of math SAT scorers took the majority of STEM degrees. The bottom third dropped out in large numbers. The data seemed to confirm it. Smarter kids stick around longer. 3. Then he looked at Harvard. The bottom third of Harvard's math SAT scores are equal to the top third at Hartwick. By the logic above, everyone at Harvard should graduate with a STEM degree. They are all brilliant. Nobody should be dropping out. 4. Harvard showed the exact same pattern as Hartwick. Top students graduated. Bottom students dropped out like flies. Even though the bottom Harvard students were objectively brilliant by any global standard. Something else entirely was driving the dropout rate. 5. That something is called relative deprivation theory. Human beings do not measure themselves against the world. They measure themselves against the people immediately around them. A Harvard student in the bottom third does not think I am in the top one percent of all students globally. They think that kid next to me keeps getting everything right and I keep getting it wrong. So they quit. 6. The research from UCLA puts a specific number on it. Your odds of graduating with a STEM degree fall by two percentage points for every ten point increase in the average SAT score of your peers. Choose Harvard over the University of Maryland and your chance of finishing a STEM degree drops by thirty percent. Thirty percent. Just to put a brand name on your resume. 7. Relative position matters more than absolute position when it comes to confidence, motivation, and self belief. The eightieth percentile student at Harvard looks up at the people above them and feels like they cannot compete. The number one student at a state school feels like they can conquer the world. That feeling drives everything. 8. The practical hiring implication is radical. Class rank matters more than institution name. Gladwell argues companies should have a don't ask don't tell policy for where someone went to college. Hiring only from top schools means missing the top students from every other school. That is not smart hiring. That is brand worship. 9. When choosing a college, never go to the best school you get into. Go to the school where you are guaranteed to be near the top of your class. Being a big fish in a smaller pond does not just feel better. It statistically produces better outcomes than being a small fish in the most prestigious pond available. 10. So why do we keep choosing Harvard over Maryland? Because we are flattered. Because the acceptance letter feels like validation. Because we make an irrational decision in a moment of enormous flattery and call it ambition. Gladwell's conclusion is simple and brutal. When we have the chance to join an elite institution we do things that are genuinely against our own interest and we feel great about it the whole time.
8:32

Malcolm Gladwell revealed why you shouldn't go to Harvard: 1. America does not have a shortage of students who want science and math degrees. It has a shortage of students who finish them. Half of all high school seniors who intend to study STEM drop out by the end of their second year. The problem is not interest. It is persistence. 2. The obvious assumption is that smarter students persist longer. So Gladwell tested it. At Hartwick College, a small liberal arts school in New York, the top third of math SAT scorers took the majority of STEM degrees. The bottom third dropped out in large numbers. The data seemed to confirm it. Smarter kids stick around longer. 3. Then he looked at Harvard. The bottom third of Harvard's math SAT scores are equal to the top third at Hartwick. By the logic above, everyone at Harvard should graduate with a STEM degree. They are all brilliant. Nobody should be dropping out. 4. Harvard showed the exact same pattern as Hartwick. Top students graduated. Bottom students dropped out like flies. Even though the bottom Harvard students were objectively brilliant by any global standard. Something else entirely was driving the dropout rate. 5. That something is called relative deprivation theory. Human beings do not measure themselves against the world. They measure themselves against the people immediately around them. A Harvard student in the bottom third does not think I am in the top one percent of all students globally. They think that kid next to me keeps getting everything right and I keep getting it wrong. So they quit. 6. The research from UCLA puts a specific number on it. Your odds of graduating with a STEM degree fall by two percentage points for every ten point increase in the average SAT score of your peers. Choose Harvard over the University of Maryland and your chance of finishing a STEM degree drops by thirty percent. Thirty percent. Just to put a brand name on your resume. 7. Relative position matters more than absolute position when it comes to confidence, motivation, and self belief. The eightieth percentile student at Harvard looks up at the people above them and feels like they cannot compete. The number one student at a state school feels like they can conquer the world. That feeling drives everything. 8. The practical hiring implication is radical. Class rank matters more than institution name. Gladwell argues companies should have a don't ask don't tell policy for where someone went to college. Hiring only from top schools means missing the top students from every other school. That is not smart hiring. That is brand worship. 9. When choosing a college, never go to the best school you get into. Go to the school where you are guaranteed to be near the top of your class. Being a big fish in a smaller pond does not just feel better. It statistically produces better outcomes than being a small fish in the most prestigious pond available. 10. So why do we keep choosing Harvard over Maryland? Because we are flattered. Because the acceptance letter feels like validation. Because we make an irrational decision in a moment of enormous flattery and call it ambition. Gladwell's conclusion is simple and brutal. When we have the chance to join an elite institution we do things that are genuinely against our own interest and we feel great about it the whole time.

Brad

365,824 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

The Clayton School district in Missouri consistently ranks as #1 or #2 in that state. Their graduates go on to the Ivies and the most competitive non-Ivy schools. The price for this is that your kids grow up indoctrinated in gender. Here is a fawning local news piece on the district's gender neutral bathrooms - for all students K-12. It is not compassionate to play along with the ruminations of the trans identifying students who are interviewed here. The reporter knows nothing of what awaits these kids if they medicalize. The kids know nothing of it either. It's OK though, as Dr. Cameron Poole, Chief of DEI, helpfully explains, in the Clayton School District they "take their direction from the kids," "the kids dictate what [they] do," and "it's hard to ignore the kids' voice." All of that is true if you are not a fully formed adult yourself. Also, the Clayton District is really rich. Like really, really, rich. So the hundreds of thousands of dollars they have spent to facilitate the confusion of their students is not a big deal for them.
2:12

The Clayton School district in Missouri consistently ranks as #1 or #2 in that state. Their graduates go on to the Ivies and the most competitive non-Ivy schools. The price for this is that your kids grow up indoctrinated in gender. Here is a fawning local news piece on the district's gender neutral bathrooms - for all students K-12. It is not compassionate to play along with the ruminations of the trans identifying students who are interviewed here. The reporter knows nothing of what awaits these kids if they medicalize. The kids know nothing of it either. It's OK though, as Dr. Cameron Poole, Chief of DEI, helpfully explains, in the Clayton School District they "take their direction from the kids," "the kids dictate what [they] do," and "it's hard to ignore the kids' voice." All of that is true if you are not a fully formed adult yourself. Also, the Clayton District is really rich. Like really, really, rich. So the hundreds of thousands of dollars they have spent to facilitate the confusion of their students is not a big deal for them.

Boris Spider

23,109 görüntüleme • 6 ay önce