Video yükleniyor...

Video Yüklenemedi

Ana Sayfaya Dön

▫️🧵I didn’t realize my original thread breaking all this down mysteriously vanished, so I had to reconstruct the entire thing from scratch. But here’s a spoiler: almost two years later- the Nova Festival footage still doesn’t make any sense. The terrain is still inconsistent, the vehicle placements are aren’t...

89,737 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce •via X (Twitter)

0 Yorum

Yorum bulunmuyor

Orijinal gönderinin yorumları burada görünecek

Benzer Videolar

📌Messages tabled by Senona: “Hi General, I trust you are well. You made arrangements that I meet this guy (Cat Matlala), because he’s your friend and brother, and he needed my help to speak to General Nkuwa to place orders on his contract. He volunteered information about the house address where Sibiya collects money using a state vehicle, and that he paid R2 million towards Sibiya for the purchase of his plot. He also told me about the townhouse, the fact that he is the one who introduced our meeting at the Ad Hoc Committee, and that he lied under oath. He invited me to make public the information that he gave me, which will put his life at risk. I am still going to that committee, and I hope he doesn’t mind me exposing him to both the General and Mr XXX (this name was reducted and the commission heard that the person named is very dangerous). I hope you won’t blame me for risking his life, because I have to tell the truth about our meeting. If he thinks he can fool the committee, it’s okay, but I will not say much, other than to simply play a recording of our meeting, because I have the record. What is worse is that after you told me about the discussion between you and him regarding Nkuwa, I asked you about your relationship with him. I still don’t know how the two of you met to discuss Nangi’s case. Besides voice recordings, cellular phone triangulation, my vehicle tracker, including access footage, will confirm the date and time of our meeting. And for his own sake, I hope that those timelines are in line with what he said before the committee in relation to his arrest. This man says he met you seven years ago, which contradicts what you told me, that you grew up together. I guess this will become clear as the investigation continues.” 🎯Verdict: No threats here, said #MadlangaCommission

Zintoh Mhlanga

41,020 görüntüleme • 6 ay önce

I hope this post gets more than my average 60 views bc it’s important. Please repost if so inclined: In the clip below from today’s Dan Bongino montage of Comey, the corrupt former FBI Director who caused chaos with the Russia Collusion Hoax, he unilaterally cleared HRC for mishandling classified materials and destroying evidence before the 2016 election. During this Press Conference I was at the FBI office with my agents working on a cartel prosecution. We all stopped to watch with amazement as Comey was initially eviscerating HRC’s unlawful conduct, but as we all now know he eventually stated “no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case!” I remember turning towards my agents and saying “well, I guess I’m an unreasonable Prosecutor . . .” I knew in that moment at my deepest core, based on years of prosecutorial experience and instinct in federal law enforcement, that the reason Comey cleared HRC had nothing to do with the prosecutability of that fact pattern - it was political interference in its most corrupt form. And here’s why. Comey had NO authority to decline prosecution. At the end of the day, he was “just a cop” so to speak. His ONLY authority was to turn the investigation over to the DOJ which has sole discretion on who to prosecute, or not. He can make a recommendation, but not a decision to not prosecute, especially based on the reason stated. That’s why this will go down as one of the most embarrassing and demoralizing moments in FBI history. My agents were crushed. They knew what just happened as much as I did. This man stepped out of his lane to cover and protect a politician, while at the same time, without any of us knowing in that moment, he was also beginning the years long political assasination of Trump in what later became the Russia Hoax.

Reeve Swainston, Esq.

610,137 görüntüleme • 2 yıl önce

Claude Monet painted the same stretch of cliff more than ninety times. The place is Étretat, a small fishing village on the coast of Normandy, where the chalk cliffs fall into the sea in great arches and a single spire of rock, the Aiguille, stands alone in the water. Monet had known the place since childhood. He grew up in Normandy, and these cliffs were among the first landscapes he ever saw... He returned to paint them again and again. He worked through the 1880s in front of the same rock formations, and across that time he produced more than ninety canvases of them: the cliffs at dawn, at sunset, under storm, under calm, in winter light and in the gold of a clear evening. In his letters to Alice, the woman he would later marry, he described the agony of it: the weather turning, the tide rising, the sun moving, the colour he had begun to capture vanishing before he could finish. He often worked on several canvases at once, switching between them as the conditions changed, racing each one against the hour. In a letter to his friend Frédéric Bazille he wrote: "It is beautiful here in Etretat. Every day I discover even more beautiful things. It is intoxicating me, and I want to paint it all, my head is bursting. I want to fight, scratch it off, start again, because I start to see and understand. It seems to me as if I can see nature and I can catch it all." The cliffs of Étretat had stood for millions of years and would look, to most people, the same on any given day. Monet saw that they were never the same even for two minutes. He stood on that shore and tried to hold, on canvas, something that exists only for an instant and then is gone forever. And that's exactly what those paintings really are: 90 attempts to keep a single, vanishing moment of light from disappearing. As Dylan Thomas once wrote: "Do not go gentle into that good night. Rage, rage against the dying of the light." -- -- -- If you want a deeper dive into the craft of painting, I recently wrote a piece exploring it in detail. You can read it here: And if you'd like to support my work, a paid subscription is what makes it possible:

James Lucas

57,710 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

Dawah is deception. Why are you leaving out the context SeerahPro ? You know right after this he says he doesn’t remember well what he wrote in that entry on Muhaymin. Why leave that part out? He even goes on to say that section seems to be non-committal and he needs to go back and re-read it. So since you don’t want to show every one the full context, I’ll do it, and expose how you are lying now and lied in the debate. Sinai doesn’t help your claim that the Quran believes the previous scriptures were textually corrupted. He says he doesn’t think the Quran believes the previous scriptures were corrupted in the deep past and that they are unrecoverable (Clip 1). Now let’s look at the short clip you pulled in context (Clip 2). First, what he says does not affirm why you cited him to begin with, which is that the Quran is supposed to be a supreme authority and determine which parts of our scriptures are corrupt and which are not. In the very clip you pulled he says, “The Quran is claiming to be able to sort of determine the correct reading of these previous scriptures and to remedy misreading and misunderstandings.” So by arbiter he means it is not determining what parts of our scriptures are true or corrupted, it is only an arbiter in determining meaning. You just buried yourself by citing this, because you implied Sinai was saying the Quran is an arbiter for determining textual corruption, which he doesn’t say. It’s like you didn’t even pay attention to what you pulled. That is embarrassing. Second, right after this (in what you left out) the interviewer reminds him he entertained two possibilities in his book and was noncommittal. Sinai says he doesn’t remember what he said and was probably leaving open possibilities, which is what I already had to correct you on. If you go back to the book, once again, he said on page 707 essentially what I said, “Muhaymin, meanwhile, is derived from Syriac mhaymnā (or conceivably from its equivalent in some other form of Aramaic), a passive participle of the verb haymen and meaning ‘trustworthy, faithful, loyal.’” After this all he does in the book is mention other possibilities and the one you want is more contingent on non-canonical readings. But even if that interpretation is correct (which Sinai confirms in this interview is his view) it doesn’t help you, because you misunderstood what Sinai means by ‘arbiter.’ In Clip 3 he first says, “So I need to reread that entry. I guess it seems to be very non-committal.” But remember you said (Clip 4), “In his 'Key Terms of the Quran' he explicitly says that Muhaymin means the Quran is the arbiter of the contents.” That is incorrect. He did not explicitly say that. Why did you lie? In Clip 3 he goes on to say “But I think entrusted with authority can mean, authorized to sort of authoritatively interpret and determine especially theological significance.” So you don’t even understand what Sinai means by “arbiter.” He doesn’t mean what you mean, that the Quran is determining which parts of our scriptures are true and corrupted, but that it is an arbiter of meaning. The fact that you still do not see this means you are beyond delusional. You never should have cited Sinai because he doesn’t help you at all. The funny thing is we were already planning to go live tomorrow to review this interview because he doesn’t help you at all and unintentionally helps with the Islamic Dilemma.

InspiringPhilosophy - Michael Jones

36,857 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

For two years I have been living in a kind of parallel universe called GME.Every single day, every week, every month I have read everything. Every filing, every tweet, every SEC filing, every forum post, every leak. I stared at the charts until my eyes hurt. And over and over the same certainty kept rising: The shorts never closed. Never. They only found new tricks, new derivatives, new lies, new media campaigns but the position? It is still sitting there. Like an elephant in the room that everyone pretends is just a piece of furniture.I was never wrong.I was just damn early.For two years I watched people call me a Hopium Junkie, friends rolling their eyes, family asking if I didn’t want to give up eventually. Two years in which the price sometimes dropped so low that even I doubted for a moment not the thesis, but only whether I could still endure it all. But deep down I knew: I am not wrong. I am simply the guy who saw the first cracks in the wall years before the earthquake even started.And now?Now the GameStop business has turned 180 degrees.The company that was once mocked as a dying dinosaur has reinvented itself. Cash flow positive, debt gone, new strategy, new leadership, new vision. No more desperate “we are trying to survive somehow” but a clear “we are building something here that none of you saw coming.” The revenue numbers, the balance sheet, all the moves everything suddenly screams: They didn’t just survive. They have transformed.And as if that weren’t enough, Michael Burry is back in the game too. The man from The Big Short, who was already in GME early, is buying again. He is long and adding. Burry trusts Ryan Cohen to become the next Warren Buffett. He sees in him a young, driven CEO with the right mindset who can create something truly special.GameStop is sitting on almost 9 billion dollars in cash and marketable securities. And Ryan Cohen is planning something big, something that has never happened before in financial history. He talks about a transformational acquisition in the consumer or retail world, about brutally efficient execution, about a model similar to Berkshire Hathaway but much faster. A deal that could take the company from a 10 billion market cap to something worth a hundred billion or more.And I sit here, after two years, with this feeling in my chest that I can barely put into is not satisfaction. Not yet. It is this deep, quiet “I told you so” mixed with an incredible calm. Because I know the big moment is still coming. The shorts are still there. The bill is still open. And this time the company is no longer the old GameStop that they almost tore apart in 2021.This time it is a completely different beast.And me? I am still here. Not because I am stubborn.But because I was right from the very beginning.Only time has finally caught up.While others who have been in this for five years or more never gave up. They held through every dip, every FUD wave, every moment of doubt, and they are still standing right beside me. True diamond hands. Their patience and conviction have been unbreakable, and now we are all watching the same story unfold together. $GME 🏴‍☠️🐇🍦🐸🍻 741676935420

Mr Infinity

15,453 görüntüleme • 4 ay önce