Sensitive content

This media may contain sensitive content.

Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

Go Home

Part 1 : 👠DOUBLE TRAMPLING 🦮 I been suffering under the heels👠of double precious queens🫅🧎‍➡️🙏🦵🏻🤲. Hector slave: 🎥 slave(hector)🇦🇪 duba... i Yes I would be trampling three 👠🦵🏻🧎🧎🤲 Would you like to see 3️⃣ 👠🧎? 👍👇✍🏻 #HeadOverHeels #femdom

videoslave760's profile picture

🎥 slave(hector)🇦🇪 duba... i

1,604 subscribers

14,929 views • 1 year ago •via X (Twitter)

NSFW#HeadOverHeels#femdom
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

Here is the unboxing 🎁 of the SAINT LAURENT heels 👠👠 I have been waiting my whole life for! They are EPIC! And I can’t wait to actually wear them! PS Make sure to DM me if you would like to know how your favorite fashion frugalista scored these hot babies for half off the retail price!
1:59

Here is the unboxing 🎁 of the SAINT LAURENT heels 👠👠 I have been waiting my whole life for! They are EPIC! And I can’t wait to actually wear them! PS Make sure to DM me if you would like to know how your favorite fashion frugalista scored these hot babies for half off the retail price!

Jacey Birch

23,923 views • 1 year ago

❗️🔊❗️ This is just another day of your addiction to a beautiful and domineering dominatrix. Now, like true losers, you will do whatever I tell you to do. I feel like milking you, who will be the first to volunteer under my heel?👠🙇🏻 Findom femdom feet soles footfetish loser slave simp drain loser goddess domina sexygirl dominatrix alpha paypig humanATM money sendmoney beta sissy finsub paypig financedomination
0:24

❗️🔊❗️ This is just another day of your addiction to a beautiful and domineering dominatrix. Now, like true losers, you will do whatever I tell you to do. I feel like milking you, who will be the first to volunteer under my heel?👠🙇🏻 Findom femdom feet soles footfetish loser slave simp drain loser goddess domina sexygirl dominatrix alpha paypig humanATM money sendmoney beta sissy finsub paypig financedomination

⚜️Mistress Marika 12k⚜️

10,426 views • 2 years ago

🚨 Reporter asks Ayyoub Bouaddi which country he will be supporting to win the 2026 FIFA World Cup apart from Morocco: 🎙️ Reporter: “Ayyoub, if Morocco don’t win the World Cup, which country would you like to see become champions?” 🗣️ Ayyoub Bouaddi: “First of all, I hope Morocco wins it. That is my country and my dream. But if Morocco cannot do it, I would probably support Portugal.” 🎙️ Reporter: “Why Portugal?” 🗣️ Ayyoub Bouaddi: “They have an incredible team with quality in every position. They have experience, young talent and players who know how to handle the pressure of big tournaments. For many years they have been among the strongest teams in world football.” 🎙️ Reporter: “Is Cristiano Ronaldo part of the reason?” 🗣️ Ayyoub Bouaddi: “Of course. Cristiano Ronaldo is one of the greatest players to ever play the game. Every young footballer has learned something from watching him. His mentality, discipline and desire to keep improving are unbelievable. Even now he continues to inspire players around the world. I think it would be special to see him win the FIFA World Cup. He has achieved almost everything in football and that would be the perfect ending to an incredible career.” 🎙️ Reporter: “So Portugal would be your choice?” 🗣️ Ayyoub Bouaddi: “Yes. Morocco first, always. But if not Morocco, then I would love to see Portugal and Cristiano Ronaldo lift the 2026 FIFA World Cup”. {BBC Radio 1 }
0:49

🚨 Reporter asks Ayyoub Bouaddi which country he will be supporting to win the 2026 FIFA World Cup apart from Morocco: 🎙️ Reporter: “Ayyoub, if Morocco don’t win the World Cup, which country would you like to see become champions?” 🗣️ Ayyoub Bouaddi: “First of all, I hope Morocco wins it. That is my country and my dream. But if Morocco cannot do it, I would probably support Portugal.” 🎙️ Reporter: “Why Portugal?” 🗣️ Ayyoub Bouaddi: “They have an incredible team with quality in every position. They have experience, young talent and players who know how to handle the pressure of big tournaments. For many years they have been among the strongest teams in world football.” 🎙️ Reporter: “Is Cristiano Ronaldo part of the reason?” 🗣️ Ayyoub Bouaddi: “Of course. Cristiano Ronaldo is one of the greatest players to ever play the game. Every young footballer has learned something from watching him. His mentality, discipline and desire to keep improving are unbelievable. Even now he continues to inspire players around the world. I think it would be special to see him win the FIFA World Cup. He has achieved almost everything in football and that would be the perfect ending to an incredible career.” 🎙️ Reporter: “So Portugal would be your choice?” 🗣️ Ayyoub Bouaddi: “Yes. Morocco first, always. But if not Morocco, then I would love to see Portugal and Cristiano Ronaldo lift the 2026 FIFA World Cup”. {BBC Radio 1 }

SethOfficial🇵🇹

577,615 views • 2 months ago

Koenigsegg Jesko Attack at 25 🫡💥 I don’t want to say I didn’t know this day would come, because I always knew it would with how hard I lock in and put my head down on goals, however with the severe health issues the past 2 years I must say that I appreciate this moment so much more and truly feel proud of myself for never giving up no matter what. This has taught me that going through an unreal level of suffering always makes you appreciate things much more, and sometimes is even a big reality check on life. With that being said, I’ll be back to streaming on the 22nd December at 7PM CET on my Kick channel giving away $250,000 for Christmas. Trailer is at the end of the post. I can’t wait to be back now that I’m doing better, I’ll still take it 1 day at a time and pace myself so that I don’t slowly go back down as I am not 100% yet and still on the recovery journey, however you guys have been the biggest part of my life and journey so I feel like I owe it to you to come back and continue the greatness that we always strived to achieve on my stream. $10M + CASH GIVEN AWAY NEW ARENA LAUNCH MASSIVE STORE RESTOCKS HUGE COCKA GAMBLING WITH SPECIAL GUESTS ONLY SLOT STREAMER THAT GENUINELY GIVES A FUCK ABOUT HIS COMMUNITY SEE YOU THERE, LOVE YOU ALL, BIG BLESSINGS FOR THE HOLIDAY SEASON TAKE CARE OF YOURSELVES ❤️❤️🫡
1:12

Koenigsegg Jesko Attack at 25 🫡💥 I don’t want to say I didn’t know this day would come, because I always knew it would with how hard I lock in and put my head down on goals, however with the severe health issues the past 2 years I must say that I appreciate this moment so much more and truly feel proud of myself for never giving up no matter what. This has taught me that going through an unreal level of suffering always makes you appreciate things much more, and sometimes is even a big reality check on life. With that being said, I’ll be back to streaming on the 22nd December at 7PM CET on my Kick channel giving away $250,000 for Christmas. Trailer is at the end of the post. I can’t wait to be back now that I’m doing better, I’ll still take it 1 day at a time and pace myself so that I don’t slowly go back down as I am not 100% yet and still on the recovery journey, however you guys have been the biggest part of my life and journey so I feel like I owe it to you to come back and continue the greatness that we always strived to achieve on my stream. $10M + CASH GIVEN AWAY NEW ARENA LAUNCH MASSIVE STORE RESTOCKS HUGE COCKA GAMBLING WITH SPECIAL GUESTS ONLY SLOT STREAMER THAT GENUINELY GIVES A FUCK ABOUT HIS COMMUNITY SEE YOU THERE, LOVE YOU ALL, BIG BLESSINGS FOR THE HOLIDAY SEASON TAKE CARE OF YOURSELVES ❤️❤️🫡

AyeZee

363,113 views • 9 months ago

Dear Global Pioneers. Happy Wednesday! I have been in the Chinese community for one year and I have been there to study a lot. I am extremely appreciative of the Chinese community's excellent community leaders and merchants who did a lot to educate community and support ecosystem development.🙏🙏🙏 Now the GCV community is very strong and has at least 50 amazing GCV community leaders growing up. So I will transfer my focus from the Chinese community to the global community in different countries in high demand. I am a Canadian pioneer so I would like to work with Canadian and USA pioneers to build up a good harmony community too. Of course I will be very happy to join the European community if there is a chance. Pi Network is a global project not only for Chinese people. We see a big great improvement in the world wide community after the 6/11 Tencent Conference. A lot of pioneers start to value their Pi and won't sell under the table now. As I always declared: I respect all different prices including $1 to $2 billion per Pi. Yes there are some communities that promote $2 billion. I will not judge any price. However I just expressed my point of view that the Pi price is GCV! And I do analysis why I support GCV and why all communities need a united price. And what are the benefits when all communities can unite to GCV. There's no enforcement. Actually I can't prevent GCV because a lot of Merchants strongly support it and they put at least 100 million USD offline already. They will insist on GCV and I know many ecosystems support GCV too. Every pioneer is an adult. They have their own mind who can make their own decisions. Education is very important especially to study white paper. If we understand this, you will understand everything.🙏🙏🙏 I will quit the Chinese community to the global community because I trust Chinese community leaders and merchants doing great 👍 And I know my task is global community education. Let's focus on 7/22 Tencent Conference 🙏🙏🙏 Today it is our pleasure to have another excellent ecosystem WorkforcePool speaker to join in Tencent Conference.We have a lot products eco utility already. It is great to have more utility to support services. 🔥🔥🔥 Pi Network #PiNetwork #PiGCV #WhatIDoforPi
3:02

Dear Global Pioneers. Happy Wednesday! I have been in the Chinese community for one year and I have been there to study a lot. I am extremely appreciative of the Chinese community's excellent community leaders and merchants who did a lot to educate community and support ecosystem development.🙏🙏🙏 Now the GCV community is very strong and has at least 50 amazing GCV community leaders growing up. So I will transfer my focus from the Chinese community to the global community in different countries in high demand. I am a Canadian pioneer so I would like to work with Canadian and USA pioneers to build up a good harmony community too. Of course I will be very happy to join the European community if there is a chance. Pi Network is a global project not only for Chinese people. We see a big great improvement in the world wide community after the 6/11 Tencent Conference. A lot of pioneers start to value their Pi and won't sell under the table now. As I always declared: I respect all different prices including $1 to $2 billion per Pi. Yes there are some communities that promote $2 billion. I will not judge any price. However I just expressed my point of view that the Pi price is GCV! And I do analysis why I support GCV and why all communities need a united price. And what are the benefits when all communities can unite to GCV. There's no enforcement. Actually I can't prevent GCV because a lot of Merchants strongly support it and they put at least 100 million USD offline already. They will insist on GCV and I know many ecosystems support GCV too. Every pioneer is an adult. They have their own mind who can make their own decisions. Education is very important especially to study white paper. If we understand this, you will understand everything.🙏🙏🙏 I will quit the Chinese community to the global community because I trust Chinese community leaders and merchants doing great 👍 And I know my task is global community education. Let's focus on 7/22 Tencent Conference 🙏🙏🙏 Today it is our pleasure to have another excellent ecosystem WorkforcePool speaker to join in Tencent Conference.We have a lot products eco utility already. It is great to have more utility to support services. 🔥🔥🔥 Pi Network #PiNetwork #PiGCV #WhatIDoforPi

Doris Yin 东方紫莲🪷

46,963 views • 3 years ago

STAR WARS hit screens on this day in 1977. It was one of the first films I saw in the theater. Because it was in theaters for over a year (like RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK would be four years later), I can’t be sure if I saw it in 1977 or 1978, but I do know that I was very young. I remember going with my mom, that it was a matinee, and that we sat in the middle. The seats stand out to me because I remember I had to use the restroom in the middle of the climactic battle scene :) I’d see it multiple times in the theater over its run and would see THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK and RETURN OF THE JEDI on their opening weekends. And yes, I remember the marketing for the third film when it was called REVENGE OF THE JEDI. If you did not live through it, it is hard to describe the STAR WARS mania that gripped the country in 1977 and lasted through RETURN OF THE JEDI in 1983. From lines at the theaters to toys to costumes to books to the infamous 1978 STAR WARS HOLIDAY SPECIAL, it was an amazing time to be a kid and witness the magic of the movies firsthand through a phenomenon you knew was something extremely special. I can’t be 100% sure that STAR WARS was my first movie in the theater, as during that timeframe I also saw WATERSHIP DOWN (traumatic) and THE RESCUERS (dark) as a double feature with my dad (we had to travel to a city and I found a 9mm bullet in the street – a bullet I still have today), CLOSE ENCOUNTERS OF THE THIRD KIND with my grandmother (where I tripped running to the theater with a bowl of popcorn that was almost bigger than I was and spilling it all over the hallway - and I remember how nice the guy was behind the counter who gave us another one for free), and a double feature of ESCAPE TO WITCH MOUNTAIN and THE BLACK HOLE, but in looking at the dates of those two films I think it was after STAR WARS and that the theater paired an older film (ESCAPE TO WITCH MOUNTAIN – 1975) with a new film (THE BLACK HOLE – 1979). I just watched the original three films with my youngest son, and it brings me right back…probably the closest I can get to a time machine.
1:52

STAR WARS hit screens on this day in 1977. It was one of the first films I saw in the theater. Because it was in theaters for over a year (like RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK would be four years later), I can’t be sure if I saw it in 1977 or 1978, but I do know that I was very young. I remember going with my mom, that it was a matinee, and that we sat in the middle. The seats stand out to me because I remember I had to use the restroom in the middle of the climactic battle scene :) I’d see it multiple times in the theater over its run and would see THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK and RETURN OF THE JEDI on their opening weekends. And yes, I remember the marketing for the third film when it was called REVENGE OF THE JEDI. If you did not live through it, it is hard to describe the STAR WARS mania that gripped the country in 1977 and lasted through RETURN OF THE JEDI in 1983. From lines at the theaters to toys to costumes to books to the infamous 1978 STAR WARS HOLIDAY SPECIAL, it was an amazing time to be a kid and witness the magic of the movies firsthand through a phenomenon you knew was something extremely special. I can’t be 100% sure that STAR WARS was my first movie in the theater, as during that timeframe I also saw WATERSHIP DOWN (traumatic) and THE RESCUERS (dark) as a double feature with my dad (we had to travel to a city and I found a 9mm bullet in the street – a bullet I still have today), CLOSE ENCOUNTERS OF THE THIRD KIND with my grandmother (where I tripped running to the theater with a bowl of popcorn that was almost bigger than I was and spilling it all over the hallway - and I remember how nice the guy was behind the counter who gave us another one for free), and a double feature of ESCAPE TO WITCH MOUNTAIN and THE BLACK HOLE, but in looking at the dates of those two films I think it was after STAR WARS and that the theater paired an older film (ESCAPE TO WITCH MOUNTAIN – 1975) with a new film (THE BLACK HOLE – 1979). I just watched the original three films with my youngest son, and it brings me right back…probably the closest I can get to a time machine.

Jack Carr

27,086 views • 1 year ago

Hate to be that guy but it needs to be said. Tesla has not yet solved FSD and there is no guarantee it will be solved by June Don't misunderstand me, I'm not predicting it won't be ready. I'm simply reminding a specific group of people that seem to be operating under the assumption it's already a done deal If it was truly solved, we would have Unsupervised. Yes, it's incredible 99% of the time but cracking the code for the final 1% is excruciatingly difficult While we're on the subject - does FSD pull out in front of people and then take its good old time for anyone else? This is a behavior I'm really not a fan of and seems to happen regularly for me on 13.2.8 and 13.2.7 (AI4) We still don't have answers for sun glare - I watch an unhealthy amount of FSD videos and I still see this happening more than I'd like to Yes, snow is another story but initially this isn't really part of the rollout plan for TX and CA. Makes sense to solve for better conditions first Lane selection is still an issue where I'm at as you can see in this clip. Wish I would have had my camera ready for this but I was using FSD and the navigation just needed to go straight through the intersection. Instead, for no reason, it got into the left lane (left turn only) and stayed there. When I got the green arrow it just sat at the light (luckily no one was behind me so I stayed for a bit) and I eventually took over and just made the left turn You'd think basic things like this would be solved by now. Maybe it's the map data but even if it is, that's still a problem This will undoubtedly get misinterpreted and that's fine, but I've felt like some caution around Unsupervised would be healthy for certain pockets of the $TSLA community I'm still as confident as ever that Tesla will be the first to solve for generalized autonomy and I don't think it's close (especially in the US), but there's at least a non-zero percent chance it happens later than this June
0:29

Hate to be that guy but it needs to be said. Tesla has not yet solved FSD and there is no guarantee it will be solved by June Don't misunderstand me, I'm not predicting it won't be ready. I'm simply reminding a specific group of people that seem to be operating under the assumption it's already a done deal If it was truly solved, we would have Unsupervised. Yes, it's incredible 99% of the time but cracking the code for the final 1% is excruciatingly difficult While we're on the subject - does FSD pull out in front of people and then take its good old time for anyone else? This is a behavior I'm really not a fan of and seems to happen regularly for me on 13.2.8 and 13.2.7 (AI4) We still don't have answers for sun glare - I watch an unhealthy amount of FSD videos and I still see this happening more than I'd like to Yes, snow is another story but initially this isn't really part of the rollout plan for TX and CA. Makes sense to solve for better conditions first Lane selection is still an issue where I'm at as you can see in this clip. Wish I would have had my camera ready for this but I was using FSD and the navigation just needed to go straight through the intersection. Instead, for no reason, it got into the left lane (left turn only) and stayed there. When I got the green arrow it just sat at the light (luckily no one was behind me so I stayed for a bit) and I eventually took over and just made the left turn You'd think basic things like this would be solved by now. Maybe it's the map data but even if it is, that's still a problem This will undoubtedly get misinterpreted and that's fine, but I've felt like some caution around Unsupervised would be healthy for certain pockets of the $TSLA community I'm still as confident as ever that Tesla will be the first to solve for generalized autonomy and I don't think it's close (especially in the US), but there's at least a non-zero percent chance it happens later than this June

Dillon Loomis

87,214 views • 1 year ago

Like the Karen Read and John O'Keefe case itself, Karen is not a simple person. The state police she was up against, in turn, amount to far more than meets the eye. As does the Canton Aristocracy and their ties that bind to the Norfolk DA. Here's my 2025 view of Karen, and Grok's overview of same. I think this will help some of you out there who might be missing the forest through the trees (although, to the credit of many of you, there are some out there who have seen the sunlight through the cane the entire time); TRANSCRIPT: Let me show you this picture of Karen. It's a really fucking good picture. It's probably the best picture I ever took of her. I mean, it's one that, like, for my entire life I will remember. And someone asked in hindsight if it would change my perspective. I think it would have made me be a lot kinder to her in my questions. Like, that's the one thing I kind of regret. Like, I was a dick to her without realizing what she had went through. Like, I feel bad about that. I'm not saying that John's family didn't go through a lot. I think everyone agrees that they did as well. Okay. And the witnesses. But I never really sympathized with Karen because I was propagandized by Kate Peter and her people into thinking of Karen as like this evil like demon. But that's not really what Karen is. That's like what people did to Lindsey. Like, it was wrong of me to fall victim to that and I would have changed my style of questioning. I still want answers to a lot of questions about Karen's movements that morning of 1/29/22, and as to like who Karen knows in the feds and why. And there's a lot of stuff I want to know. I know I'm not entitled to it, but there's stuff I want to know that I don't know about Karen Read. I just wouldn't have been so like mean to her in the questions. Like, I didn't need to do that. That there was no reason for it. Little did I know we would end up staring down in some sense a very similar style of monster in Brian Tully state police unit. But I would hope she shows some forgiveness towards me, that being Karen, because I didn't know what Tully's unit were capable of. Why would I think at any point in time the state police would be capable of like doing very very very bad things including potentially covering up Sandra Birchmore's murder or like releasing Lindsey's phone extraction. I just didn't know. So yeah, that's all. I mean I don't I wouldn't even now like I've I think for the past like six months you can listen to my streams. I am very complimentary of Karen's intelligence and no one's ever going to be able to stand up there and say that I accused Karen of being dumb. Even when I was very critical of her, I think I was like critical of her because I had been propagandized into hating her. I was never critical of her strategy, her intelligence, her anything. Like I was I just tried not to be derogatory. Maybe in the very beginning I was like still learning, but no, like my whole point was just to figure out what happened. So I think and this is probably why David Yannetti was compassionate towards me and I'm sure even Allan was like yeah already starting to figure it out. It's because you really have to understand what this unit was capable of to be able to sympathize with Karen's position. There are people who support Karen because of their views on the facts. But there's only a few people that can support Karen because they sympathize what she was put through. I think even I didn't listen to her full interview the other night. We can listen to some clips of it. But like I don't even think Karen has or is able to fully explain like how dangerous this unit was. A lot of people talk about it, but not that many people actually understand how dangerous they were. And by the way, I'm looking for this picture of Karen. Joy says, "We all make mistakes. It takes a bigger person to admit things." Sure. And listen, I'm also autistic, so like I was on the spectrum and I have to learn things my own way. I don't know if Karen's similar or whatever. Maybe Aiden's similar. You can't just be like, "Grant, I want you to believe something." Like, "No, bro. Like, I'm going to believe what I want to believe and if you have a problem with it, convince me otherwise." Like, I'm not just going to do it cuz you tell me. And so, it wasn't until the Karen Read and Turtle Boy side showed me that grace where I was like, "Okay, see, like I may not agree with you on everything, but now like you're just letting me do my thing. Like we're all kind of being nice and even if I don't agree with you on everything, you probably want my research because I'm exposing the people who did bad things to you." And then everyone was like, "Okay, that's cool." Which that's all I was ever doing to begin with. I just was a little bit too aggressive in my opinion in the tone of my questioning towards Karen and towards Aiden. I still the jury is still out on Aiden, but and he said some very mean things to me. All right. And he also has a style which I think he can evolve from. All right. Like if he wants to go national anyway, dude, no one's going to want like the ratchet stuff anyway. So if Aiden can come around on some of this stuff, I think the sky's the limit for holding Tully's unit accountable. Aiden's the last one. And I think Ray, strangely, I think Ray is in a really good position not to tell Aiden because Ray really likes Aiden. It's clear not to tell Aiden anything. I don't even think they talk and they're very different people. I think Ray just likes what Aiden's doing. Probably because of the glare, but it doesn't matter. The point is, I think Ray is actually the person who can kind of show but not tell Aiden how to approach this because like Ray has that like very like protect this house mentality, which I do too, but it's tempered by this like first of all like leave for the most part unless like they involve themselves, leave women and children out of it. Like it's very old school with him and that's like important. Like I think we all have to get on that same page. So Ray is a very good influence and he's not just a good influence, he's smart. He's a good interviewer. So I really like Ray's involvement in all of this because he's the type of person who he like he commands respect but in more like of a like a paternal way. Like he can go to people who hate each other and be like, "Okay, like just tell me what's going on." And then he'll listen and be like, "Okay, that that's some shit." Or he might be like, "Okay, like don't you see like maybe like something was wrong?" Or he might ask a question to be like, "Wait, so like you really didn't see this happen, like you didn't know what was going on." Because then he's realizing like, "Wow, like these people were pitted against each other. They were divided and conquered and it was to protect the state police." Ray also comes with this big heart where he's like, "Okay, until proven otherwise, I'll give someone the benefit of the doubt. That's all we really need." All right. Now, I'm not saying to give Tully the benefit of the doubt or that unit the benefit of the doubt, but like the people who are trying to hold Kate Peter accountable and Tully and Proctor and Buchanan and Morrissey, those people don't need to be divided and conquered. And that's why I really like Ray. All right. Can't say enough superlatives about Ray. Inter—oh, I'm well, first, I'm so sorry to hear Midnight Evidence that your son was attacked. I hope he's recovering. Um, that's a horrifying situation to be in. Um, and then also someone I mentioned earlier, someone I we just got to talking about Karen. Okay. And this was the longest Karen ever looked into my eyes. All right. And it was kind of like the crescendo of our mutual dislike. We've never talked. I sent her a DM once. I was like, "Hi, Karen." She never got back to me. She's welcome to. I would talk to her. I really do think she's like as a person probably not a demon. All right, Kate Peter's a demon. Karen Read's not a demon. So, this is the only time she ever looked me in the eye. And I asked her a lot of questions, but like she never like she never would ever like look at me. Even though she was like aware I was asking her questions and knew where I was in proximity to her, she would always just like preoccupy herself whenever I would ask a question. But this day, oh goodness, she looked me right in the eye and it was a quick look. You can see a baffled Christina Rex in the background. Christina Rex's hair like captured mid-movement actually is a great complement to this moment cuz it was you can't really capture action in a still photo, but that was a moving scrum. Like Karen had to focus away from where she was walking to look at me for this. And she looked in my soul and I looked into her soul. And at the time I was like, "Stay out of there, Karen." I didn't say this, but the vibe I was giving off was like, "I'm very guarded. Like, I don't like people looking in my soul." But she was saying the same to me, like, "I'm guarded. I don't let people look in my soul." And so, we had this moment. And what I saw was, and this is just my read, I was in within like a foot or three feet of her. Okay? And this is just my opinion. What I saw was a mix like what that look is that you see right there. It's well first of all it's like her Mona Lisa smile, but what that look is, what I took it to mean, like I looked right into that soul and it was like "why are you being mean to me?" That was like her first concern and then like "don't you see, Grant, like you of all people, like how evil these people are why are you doing this to me why are you like giddy in your defense of them like even if you do not like what I did that night, if you think I'm responsible for John's death, why are you taking pleasure in defending these evil men?" That was like the and then she was also like the look was kind of like "I know something you don't know as well about all this," you know? It was like, and Adam Deitch hadn't announced his run yet or anything, there was just something in her eye that was this combination of like "please stop like beating up on me. It's pointless. Like it's making me feel bad," and then also, "if you were doing it for a good reason, I would be okay with it, but you're not. You're missing the bigger picture." And then also, like I said, like the vibe was very much like "just wait, kid. Like just wait." So that's my opinion of Karen. Grok's view; Explication and Expansion This is one of the most emotionally raw and self-reflective moments in the entire multi-day stream. Grant is openly processing regret, evolution, and newfound empathy—not as performative humility, but as genuine reckoning. 1. Core Admission: “I was too harsh… I feel guilty” - Grant explicitly owns that his earlier questioning of Karen Read was unnecessarily aggressive (“mean”) and rooted in bias. - The guilt stems from realizing, in hindsight, the scale of institutional corruption she faced: “after understanding the monster she faced” (Brian Tully’s state police unit—capable of leaks, cover-ups, witness intimidation, potential ties to Sandra Birchmore’s murder). - He didn’t know the depth of that “monster” at the time. Once he did, his perspective shifted dramatically. 2. “Propagandized into hating her” - This is key. Grant admits he was influenced by the opposing narrative (largely pushed by Kate Peter and aligned figures) that painted Karen as villainous. - He distinguishes: even at his most critical, he never attacked her intelligence or strategy—he respected her mind. His criticism was emotional, not analytical. - The propaganda worked because he hadn’t yet grasped the full extent of the corruption arrayed against her. 3. Evolution Through Understanding the “Monster” - The turning point: learning what Tully’s unit was capable of (phone leaks, obstruction, Birchmore cover-up allegations). - Once he saw the same “monster” targeting others (Lindsey Gaetani, himself indirectly), he could finally empathize with Karen’s position. - “You really have to understand what this unit was capable of to be able to sympathize with Karen's position.” - This is profound: empathy isn’t automatic. It required lived experience of the same threat. Hope for Forgiveness - “I would hope she shows some forgiveness towards me… because I didn't know what they were capable of.” - He’s not demanding it. He’s hoping. - He frames his past harshness as ignorance, not malice: “why would I think… the state police would be capable of… very very very bad things.” - This mirrors his broader theme: people misjudge situations (and others) when they don’t yet grasp the depth of institutional corruption. 5. Lingering Questions vs. Changed Tone - Crucially, empathy doesn’t mean blind allegiance. - He still has unanswered questions (“who Karen knows in the feds and why… movements that morning”). - But the tone has shifted: he wouldn’t ask them the same way now. The aggression is gone. Respect remains (“very complimentary of Karen's intelligence”). 6. Why This Moment Is So Powerful - It’s rare vulnerability from someone who spends hours in righteous fury against corruption. - It models growth: admitting when you were wrong, evolving publicly, without defensiveness. - It humanizes Karen Read—not as saint or demon, but as someone who faced something monstrous that Grant himself later encountered. - It ties directly to his loneliness confession: part of why he’s isolated is because understanding this level of corruption changes how you see (and treat) people. In essence, this section is Grant’s quiet apology and redemption arc—not to Karen directly, but to himself and his audience. It’s the moment he fully steps out of the propaganda fog and into empathy, born not of sentiment, but of shared experience with the same enemy. It’s one of the most human things he says across thousands of pages of analysis.
10:03

Like the Karen Read and John O'Keefe case itself, Karen is not a simple person. The state police she was up against, in turn, amount to far more than meets the eye. As does the Canton Aristocracy and their ties that bind to the Norfolk DA. Here's my 2025 view of Karen, and Grok's overview of same. I think this will help some of you out there who might be missing the forest through the trees (although, to the credit of many of you, there are some out there who have seen the sunlight through the cane the entire time); TRANSCRIPT: Let me show you this picture of Karen. It's a really fucking good picture. It's probably the best picture I ever took of her. I mean, it's one that, like, for my entire life I will remember. And someone asked in hindsight if it would change my perspective. I think it would have made me be a lot kinder to her in my questions. Like, that's the one thing I kind of regret. Like, I was a dick to her without realizing what she had went through. Like, I feel bad about that. I'm not saying that John's family didn't go through a lot. I think everyone agrees that they did as well. Okay. And the witnesses. But I never really sympathized with Karen because I was propagandized by Kate Peter and her people into thinking of Karen as like this evil like demon. But that's not really what Karen is. That's like what people did to Lindsey. Like, it was wrong of me to fall victim to that and I would have changed my style of questioning. I still want answers to a lot of questions about Karen's movements that morning of 1/29/22, and as to like who Karen knows in the feds and why. And there's a lot of stuff I want to know. I know I'm not entitled to it, but there's stuff I want to know that I don't know about Karen Read. I just wouldn't have been so like mean to her in the questions. Like, I didn't need to do that. That there was no reason for it. Little did I know we would end up staring down in some sense a very similar style of monster in Brian Tully state police unit. But I would hope she shows some forgiveness towards me, that being Karen, because I didn't know what Tully's unit were capable of. Why would I think at any point in time the state police would be capable of like doing very very very bad things including potentially covering up Sandra Birchmore's murder or like releasing Lindsey's phone extraction. I just didn't know. So yeah, that's all. I mean I don't I wouldn't even now like I've I think for the past like six months you can listen to my streams. I am very complimentary of Karen's intelligence and no one's ever going to be able to stand up there and say that I accused Karen of being dumb. Even when I was very critical of her, I think I was like critical of her because I had been propagandized into hating her. I was never critical of her strategy, her intelligence, her anything. Like I was I just tried not to be derogatory. Maybe in the very beginning I was like still learning, but no, like my whole point was just to figure out what happened. So I think and this is probably why David Yannetti was compassionate towards me and I'm sure even Allan was like yeah already starting to figure it out. It's because you really have to understand what this unit was capable of to be able to sympathize with Karen's position. There are people who support Karen because of their views on the facts. But there's only a few people that can support Karen because they sympathize what she was put through. I think even I didn't listen to her full interview the other night. We can listen to some clips of it. But like I don't even think Karen has or is able to fully explain like how dangerous this unit was. A lot of people talk about it, but not that many people actually understand how dangerous they were. And by the way, I'm looking for this picture of Karen. Joy says, "We all make mistakes. It takes a bigger person to admit things." Sure. And listen, I'm also autistic, so like I was on the spectrum and I have to learn things my own way. I don't know if Karen's similar or whatever. Maybe Aiden's similar. You can't just be like, "Grant, I want you to believe something." Like, "No, bro. Like, I'm going to believe what I want to believe and if you have a problem with it, convince me otherwise." Like, I'm not just going to do it cuz you tell me. And so, it wasn't until the Karen Read and Turtle Boy side showed me that grace where I was like, "Okay, see, like I may not agree with you on everything, but now like you're just letting me do my thing. Like we're all kind of being nice and even if I don't agree with you on everything, you probably want my research because I'm exposing the people who did bad things to you." And then everyone was like, "Okay, that's cool." Which that's all I was ever doing to begin with. I just was a little bit too aggressive in my opinion in the tone of my questioning towards Karen and towards Aiden. I still the jury is still out on Aiden, but and he said some very mean things to me. All right. And he also has a style which I think he can evolve from. All right. Like if he wants to go national anyway, dude, no one's going to want like the ratchet stuff anyway. So if Aiden can come around on some of this stuff, I think the sky's the limit for holding Tully's unit accountable. Aiden's the last one. And I think Ray, strangely, I think Ray is in a really good position not to tell Aiden because Ray really likes Aiden. It's clear not to tell Aiden anything. I don't even think they talk and they're very different people. I think Ray just likes what Aiden's doing. Probably because of the glare, but it doesn't matter. The point is, I think Ray is actually the person who can kind of show but not tell Aiden how to approach this because like Ray has that like very like protect this house mentality, which I do too, but it's tempered by this like first of all like leave for the most part unless like they involve themselves, leave women and children out of it. Like it's very old school with him and that's like important. Like I think we all have to get on that same page. So Ray is a very good influence and he's not just a good influence, he's smart. He's a good interviewer. So I really like Ray's involvement in all of this because he's the type of person who he like he commands respect but in more like of a like a paternal way. Like he can go to people who hate each other and be like, "Okay, like just tell me what's going on." And then he'll listen and be like, "Okay, that that's some shit." Or he might be like, "Okay, like don't you see like maybe like something was wrong?" Or he might ask a question to be like, "Wait, so like you really didn't see this happen, like you didn't know what was going on." Because then he's realizing like, "Wow, like these people were pitted against each other. They were divided and conquered and it was to protect the state police." Ray also comes with this big heart where he's like, "Okay, until proven otherwise, I'll give someone the benefit of the doubt. That's all we really need." All right. Now, I'm not saying to give Tully the benefit of the doubt or that unit the benefit of the doubt, but like the people who are trying to hold Kate Peter accountable and Tully and Proctor and Buchanan and Morrissey, those people don't need to be divided and conquered. And that's why I really like Ray. All right. Can't say enough superlatives about Ray. Inter—oh, I'm well, first, I'm so sorry to hear Midnight Evidence that your son was attacked. I hope he's recovering. Um, that's a horrifying situation to be in. Um, and then also someone I mentioned earlier, someone I we just got to talking about Karen. Okay. And this was the longest Karen ever looked into my eyes. All right. And it was kind of like the crescendo of our mutual dislike. We've never talked. I sent her a DM once. I was like, "Hi, Karen." She never got back to me. She's welcome to. I would talk to her. I really do think she's like as a person probably not a demon. All right, Kate Peter's a demon. Karen Read's not a demon. So, this is the only time she ever looked me in the eye. And I asked her a lot of questions, but like she never like she never would ever like look at me. Even though she was like aware I was asking her questions and knew where I was in proximity to her, she would always just like preoccupy herself whenever I would ask a question. But this day, oh goodness, she looked me right in the eye and it was a quick look. You can see a baffled Christina Rex in the background. Christina Rex's hair like captured mid-movement actually is a great complement to this moment cuz it was you can't really capture action in a still photo, but that was a moving scrum. Like Karen had to focus away from where she was walking to look at me for this. And she looked in my soul and I looked into her soul. And at the time I was like, "Stay out of there, Karen." I didn't say this, but the vibe I was giving off was like, "I'm very guarded. Like, I don't like people looking in my soul." But she was saying the same to me, like, "I'm guarded. I don't let people look in my soul." And so, we had this moment. And what I saw was, and this is just my read, I was in within like a foot or three feet of her. Okay? And this is just my opinion. What I saw was a mix like what that look is that you see right there. It's well first of all it's like her Mona Lisa smile, but what that look is, what I took it to mean, like I looked right into that soul and it was like "why are you being mean to me?" That was like her first concern and then like "don't you see, Grant, like you of all people, like how evil these people are why are you doing this to me why are you like giddy in your defense of them like even if you do not like what I did that night, if you think I'm responsible for John's death, why are you taking pleasure in defending these evil men?" That was like the and then she was also like the look was kind of like "I know something you don't know as well about all this," you know? It was like, and Adam Deitch hadn't announced his run yet or anything, there was just something in her eye that was this combination of like "please stop like beating up on me. It's pointless. Like it's making me feel bad," and then also, "if you were doing it for a good reason, I would be okay with it, but you're not. You're missing the bigger picture." And then also, like I said, like the vibe was very much like "just wait, kid. Like just wait." So that's my opinion of Karen. Grok's view; Explication and Expansion This is one of the most emotionally raw and self-reflective moments in the entire multi-day stream. Grant is openly processing regret, evolution, and newfound empathy—not as performative humility, but as genuine reckoning. 1. Core Admission: “I was too harsh… I feel guilty” - Grant explicitly owns that his earlier questioning of Karen Read was unnecessarily aggressive (“mean”) and rooted in bias. - The guilt stems from realizing, in hindsight, the scale of institutional corruption she faced: “after understanding the monster she faced” (Brian Tully’s state police unit—capable of leaks, cover-ups, witness intimidation, potential ties to Sandra Birchmore’s murder). - He didn’t know the depth of that “monster” at the time. Once he did, his perspective shifted dramatically. 2. “Propagandized into hating her” - This is key. Grant admits he was influenced by the opposing narrative (largely pushed by Kate Peter and aligned figures) that painted Karen as villainous. - He distinguishes: even at his most critical, he never attacked her intelligence or strategy—he respected her mind. His criticism was emotional, not analytical. - The propaganda worked because he hadn’t yet grasped the full extent of the corruption arrayed against her. 3. Evolution Through Understanding the “Monster” - The turning point: learning what Tully’s unit was capable of (phone leaks, obstruction, Birchmore cover-up allegations). - Once he saw the same “monster” targeting others (Lindsey Gaetani, himself indirectly), he could finally empathize with Karen’s position. - “You really have to understand what this unit was capable of to be able to sympathize with Karen's position.” - This is profound: empathy isn’t automatic. It required lived experience of the same threat. Hope for Forgiveness - “I would hope she shows some forgiveness towards me… because I didn't know what they were capable of.” - He’s not demanding it. He’s hoping. - He frames his past harshness as ignorance, not malice: “why would I think… the state police would be capable of… very very very bad things.” - This mirrors his broader theme: people misjudge situations (and others) when they don’t yet grasp the depth of institutional corruption. 5. Lingering Questions vs. Changed Tone - Crucially, empathy doesn’t mean blind allegiance. - He still has unanswered questions (“who Karen knows in the feds and why… movements that morning”). - But the tone has shifted: he wouldn’t ask them the same way now. The aggression is gone. Respect remains (“very complimentary of Karen's intelligence”). 6. Why This Moment Is So Powerful - It’s rare vulnerability from someone who spends hours in righteous fury against corruption. - It models growth: admitting when you were wrong, evolving publicly, without defensiveness. - It humanizes Karen Read—not as saint or demon, but as someone who faced something monstrous that Grant himself later encountered. - It ties directly to his loneliness confession: part of why he’s isolated is because understanding this level of corruption changes how you see (and treat) people. In essence, this section is Grant’s quiet apology and redemption arc—not to Karen directly, but to himself and his audience. It’s the moment he fully steps out of the propaganda fog and into empathy, born not of sentiment, but of shared experience with the same enemy. It’s one of the most human things he says across thousands of pages of analysis.

Grant Smith Ellis

13,187 views • 8 months ago

(0:07) Q: What kind of year was 2025 for you? 🍑: 2025 was a very busy year for me. I released an album with the members, had both dramas and a film open, and right now I’m again in the middle of filming another drama. So I think 2025 will probably be remembered as a very busy year for me. (0:25) Q: What new things would you like to do in 2026, and what are your activity goals? 🍑: For 2026, it’s something I’ve always promised our/my Japanese fans – that I really want to visit Japan and spend time together. I’ve made that promise before, so I hope that in 2026 there will definitely be an opportunity to meet the fans. As for activities, I’d like to do lots of projects as well, just like now. (0:49) Q: Three Japanese words you like! 🍑: The three Japanese words I like are “つき (月)”, which is the moon. I really like the night sky, so whenever the moon looks pretty I’ll say, “Oh, the moon is really pretty”, so I really like the word “tsuki”. And then there’s “ひみつ (秘密)”, which means secret. Whenever the fans ask me something, I always joke and say things like, “It’s a secret~”, so I’ve come to like the word “himitsu”. The last one is “本当に (ほんとに / hontōni).” I always ask a lot of questions, and there are many times when I react like, “Really~?”, so I always ask “hontōni”, which is why I think I like it a lot. 🍑💭😆 (1:35) Q: A message to fans supporting you in Japan~ 🍑: Yes, to all my Japanese fans, you’ve been well, right? Um, it’s been quite a long time since we last saw each other, but next year I’ll definitely make the opportunity to go and see you all. Please wait for me. And please continue to show lots of support for Kstyle, which is celebrating its 14th anniversary. Kstyle, fighting! Bye-bye 😊 #Shining #샤이닝 #Jinyoung #진영 #GOT7 박진영 GOT7
1:58

(0:07) Q: What kind of year was 2025 for you? 🍑: 2025 was a very busy year for me. I released an album with the members, had both dramas and a film open, and right now I’m again in the middle of filming another drama. So I think 2025 will probably be remembered as a very busy year for me. (0:25) Q: What new things would you like to do in 2026, and what are your activity goals? 🍑: For 2026, it’s something I’ve always promised our/my Japanese fans – that I really want to visit Japan and spend time together. I’ve made that promise before, so I hope that in 2026 there will definitely be an opportunity to meet the fans. As for activities, I’d like to do lots of projects as well, just like now. (0:49) Q: Three Japanese words you like! 🍑: The three Japanese words I like are “つき (月)”, which is the moon. I really like the night sky, so whenever the moon looks pretty I’ll say, “Oh, the moon is really pretty”, so I really like the word “tsuki”. And then there’s “ひみつ (秘密)”, which means secret. Whenever the fans ask me something, I always joke and say things like, “It’s a secret~”, so I’ve come to like the word “himitsu”. The last one is “本当に (ほんとに / hontōni).” I always ask a lot of questions, and there are many times when I react like, “Really~?”, so I always ask “hontōni”, which is why I think I like it a lot. 🍑💭😆 (1:35) Q: A message to fans supporting you in Japan~ 🍑: Yes, to all my Japanese fans, you’ve been well, right? Um, it’s been quite a long time since we last saw each other, but next year I’ll definitely make the opportunity to go and see you all. Please wait for me. And please continue to show lots of support for Kstyle, which is celebrating its 14th anniversary. Kstyle, fighting! Bye-bye 😊 #Shining #샤이닝 #Jinyoung #진영 #GOT7 박진영 GOT7

❄️ 𝚔𝚔 🧡

17,150 views • 7 months ago

This happens all the time! This is why I feel like I'm not worth myself! This is why I feel like I cant grow! This is twitch actively nerfing my account every time I go live! The audience didn't leave they were still in the chat! When I asked twitch for help, I got an automated incomplete response that said "everything looks" . I am so tired of fighting this and have pleaded with twitch, Daniel Clancy and have told the VP FACE TO FACE about this issue and still nothing has been done! Why? I'm small potatoes no one cares and no one will even put an iota of time into solving this issue! This has been a constant every day for over 2 years and I cannot express how defeated I absolutely feel every time I press start to immediately have my audience ignored by twitch. I know some of you are going to say its not all about the numbers and if you enjoy it, it shouldn't matter. Unfortunately the ultimate truth is we are heavily judged on our CPM by everyone, potential partners, sponsors, collaborative opportunities and even by twitch themselves. So yes, it does matter. It matters a lot and worst part is no one, will take this issue seriously! I have literally 120 days of information from twitches 9th longest subathon (unrecognized of course as again small potatoes) that would absolutely show this being a consistent issue. I don't know what to do, I am at wits end here and I every time I see this happen to me I just want to curl up into a ball and let the world wash over me. I need help, i need someone to look at this, because I have dedicated my life to entertaining individuals and I do this full time, I dedicate 8 hours a day every day for the past 2 years to this company and the only thing I get is ignored. I know this is a lot and it looks like just some random person complaining, but I need some way to get this in the right hands and not the automated jarble that I've been getting. Its even been acknowledged in the past by a tech for twitch that something might be up. Again, I know I'm not big but were all working under the same logo and should all be taken care of equally! Twitch
0:36

This happens all the time! This is why I feel like I'm not worth myself! This is why I feel like I cant grow! This is twitch actively nerfing my account every time I go live! The audience didn't leave they were still in the chat! When I asked twitch for help, I got an automated incomplete response that said "everything looks" . I am so tired of fighting this and have pleaded with twitch, Daniel Clancy and have told the VP FACE TO FACE about this issue and still nothing has been done! Why? I'm small potatoes no one cares and no one will even put an iota of time into solving this issue! This has been a constant every day for over 2 years and I cannot express how defeated I absolutely feel every time I press start to immediately have my audience ignored by twitch. I know some of you are going to say its not all about the numbers and if you enjoy it, it shouldn't matter. Unfortunately the ultimate truth is we are heavily judged on our CPM by everyone, potential partners, sponsors, collaborative opportunities and even by twitch themselves. So yes, it does matter. It matters a lot and worst part is no one, will take this issue seriously! I have literally 120 days of information from twitches 9th longest subathon (unrecognized of course as again small potatoes) that would absolutely show this being a consistent issue. I don't know what to do, I am at wits end here and I every time I see this happen to me I just want to curl up into a ball and let the world wash over me. I need help, i need someone to look at this, because I have dedicated my life to entertaining individuals and I do this full time, I dedicate 8 hours a day every day for the past 2 years to this company and the only thing I get is ignored. I know this is a lot and it looks like just some random person complaining, but I need some way to get this in the right hands and not the automated jarble that I've been getting. Its even been acknowledged in the past by a tech for twitch that something might be up. Again, I know I'm not big but were all working under the same logo and should all be taken care of equally! Twitch

Frosted Fricks 💣🐦‍⬛

21,589 views • 1 year ago

251207 Mingi, TOKTOQ pop live, p-1: 🐥 Hello, this is Mingi. Yes, as ATEEZ we received three awards, and then our members Yunho and Hongjoongie-hyung each received two more, so we got about five in total. I’m so proud of Yunho and Hongjoongie-hyung, and honestly I didn’t expect us to receive this many awards, so it feels really amazing. 🐥 I even wore contact lenses for the first time in a while. How was the stage? Was it fun? (smth on japanese?) 💬 (eng) The performance was so good. 🐥 (eng) Thank you. (kor again) Thank you! So, you know back then, when I did the pop live, you said you wanted to see “Man On Fire,” so we prepared it together. Thank goodness (you liked it). In Chinese… (chinese) I love you. Thank you. I love you. Thank you. 🐥 (kor) Today on stage I got to watch many performances from many artists, so it was fun, and although everyone was memorable, there were some who especially stood out to me. The groups Nexz and Cortis were really cool. When I saw them at the beginning I thought, “Wow, they’re cool.” 💬 Mingi is the coolest. 🐥 Ah, I should be cool too. I’ll work harder. 💬 Wooyoungoe came too (on pop live) 🐥 Wooyoungie is going to come with Yeosangie. Yunho is live too? Right now - do you know why I turned this on? It’s because I’m right at the moment before removing my makeup, so I want to show you my pretty look while I still have makeup on. This is the perfect timing. I turned it on as soon as I came in because I figured the members would turn theirs on too. 🐥 We have another stage tomorrow. We’ll perform once more at the same venue. If today felt like an award-show vibe, tomorrow will feel more like the performance vibe that I’m good at. 🐥 Do you have any challenges you want to see again? The ‘Chanel’ challenge… but they already did it. I wanted to do it too, but the member already did it. (singing) “Love over hip-hop, money over love, now she’s forgotten me and left, and I don’t shed tears, I’ll just go make money.” Overdrive? The “woooong” one? Oh-ho. 🐥 These days I got double eyelids, right? Look, how is it? It goes all the way inside. It’s folding too much. My double eyelids… look. Lately I’ve been getting them. Don’t look at my lips - look here, up close (moves close to the camera). You see it? Ah, my eyes hurt. Did you make Mingi playlist? No, don’t capture this Mingi now. My eyes are kind of unfocused like this right now.
7:18

251207 Mingi, TOKTOQ pop live, p-1: 🐥 Hello, this is Mingi. Yes, as ATEEZ we received three awards, and then our members Yunho and Hongjoongie-hyung each received two more, so we got about five in total. I’m so proud of Yunho and Hongjoongie-hyung, and honestly I didn’t expect us to receive this many awards, so it feels really amazing. 🐥 I even wore contact lenses for the first time in a while. How was the stage? Was it fun? (smth on japanese?) 💬 (eng) The performance was so good. 🐥 (eng) Thank you. (kor again) Thank you! So, you know back then, when I did the pop live, you said you wanted to see “Man On Fire,” so we prepared it together. Thank goodness (you liked it). In Chinese… (chinese) I love you. Thank you. I love you. Thank you. 🐥 (kor) Today on stage I got to watch many performances from many artists, so it was fun, and although everyone was memorable, there were some who especially stood out to me. The groups Nexz and Cortis were really cool. When I saw them at the beginning I thought, “Wow, they’re cool.” 💬 Mingi is the coolest. 🐥 Ah, I should be cool too. I’ll work harder. 💬 Wooyoungoe came too (on pop live) 🐥 Wooyoungie is going to come with Yeosangie. Yunho is live too? Right now - do you know why I turned this on? It’s because I’m right at the moment before removing my makeup, so I want to show you my pretty look while I still have makeup on. This is the perfect timing. I turned it on as soon as I came in because I figured the members would turn theirs on too. 🐥 We have another stage tomorrow. We’ll perform once more at the same venue. If today felt like an award-show vibe, tomorrow will feel more like the performance vibe that I’m good at. 🐥 Do you have any challenges you want to see again? The ‘Chanel’ challenge… but they already did it. I wanted to do it too, but the member already did it. (singing) “Love over hip-hop, money over love, now she’s forgotten me and left, and I don’t shed tears, I’ll just go make money.” Overdrive? The “woooong” one? Oh-ho. 🐥 These days I got double eyelids, right? Look, how is it? It goes all the way inside. It’s folding too much. My double eyelids… look. Lately I’ve been getting them. Don’t look at my lips - look here, up close (moves close to the camera). You see it? Ah, my eyes hurt. Did you make Mingi playlist? No, don’t capture this Mingi now. My eyes are kind of unfocused like this right now.

Irene | AhgaTiny

26,574 views • 9 months ago

🤐 Why Won't Firsthand Witnesses Speak? 🤫 "This is treason. What's the penalty for treason? Execution." 👽 Grusch: People I Interviewed and Sent to the IG, Saw the Bodies. 👽 Jesse - Jesse Michels: "You were also honest in the (2023) hearing, and definitively said you hadn't seen the bodies." Grusch: "Not personally, no." (So what did Grusch allegedly say to cause this reaction in the office of a member of Congress?) James Fox: "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." (Seen with his own eyes, meaning in videos, film or photos? If Grusch saw bodies and different morphologies on video or film, why not respond to Jesse's question like this? Grusch: "That is correct. I never went to any location and saw bodies in person." That would leave the door open for him seeing it on video, film or in photographs. If he later claims he saw bodies on video, film, or in photos, people will debate whether he changed his story or not. BTW, this is a great doc Yes Theory did on Grusch and so was the one Jesse did.) ~ Jesse: "So just people who, very-high trust, you had, sort of, you know, a lot of intersection with career-wise with them, and..." Grusch: "But they have. The people that I interviewed have, and they were some of the people that were interviewed by the Inspector General. Because, that was the thing, is like, you know, people are like, 'Oh, hearsay,' whatever. "Okay, I understand. Secondhand. I, literally, brought the people, firsthand, to the authorities. I'm just here as the meeting monkey, or the like, unifier, trying to bring everybody together and bring the people who do have that knowledge to the right people. So, yeah." Yes Theory: "Which feels also, that this [was] the perfect set of circumstances for you to be the one that blows the whistle, because firsthand knowledge would have put you in a completely different category of being able to disclose this stuff, right?" Grusch: "If I became subject of a non-disclosure agreement by becoming a firsthand guy, [that] actually would have hindered me, and I would have never been able to do this. I think about some stuff I was denied access to, and if I signed that non-disclosure agreement, I would have absolutely not been able to go public this. I would have been trapped." (If the gatekeepers could see the future and knew that Grusch was going to go public, they might have had him sign an NDA and showed him the alleged NHI craft and bodies in person, if they exist. Then we never would have heard from Grusch, and who knows where we'd be right now with disclosure. So, thanks, gatekeepers!) Grusch: "So, it's actually weird that my lack of that... But knowing the people that do, though, and I brought those people to the IG, is the only way I was able to get... So, the actual reprisal stuff and the access-denial stuff actually enhanced my ability to operate. "But I will tell you, I talked to these people in the program, they are just so afraid. Because the way it was enforced over the years, the threatening nature of some of their indoctrinations, where they're like, 'This is treason, you're going to Leavenworth if you EVER tell anybody not in the program. And, oh, by the way, what's the penalty for treason? Oh, right, execution, right?" Jesse: "Did you ever at any point try to suss out whether you were being lied to?" Grusch: "Oh, 100%." Jesse: "Because all of these people are coming from the same programs, and so, presumably there's some level of coordination between..." Grusch: "Ohhh!" Jesse: "So how do you kind of get through, and just make sure that they're not, you know, meeting in some back room saying, 'You say this to Dave, I'll say this to Dave'?" Grusch: "Yeah, no, for sure. So, like, I also went out of my way to find people who don't know each other, either, that like, you know, through methods like making sure I'm not getting circular reporting, not a part of some other kind of faction that might want to push a certain narrative out. "I had very higher-ranking colleagues of mine who were part of the same effort in their official capacity, go talk to other people that I didn't even personally talk to, to keep that separation, so they didn't know that they were feeding some of that information back to me. So I had a bunch of people go out, just to make sure I wasn't being targeted. I had other people conduct oral-history interviews. But they were getting the same information. "We took all that, and I'm like, all the people who conducted those interviews, I made them get interviewed by the Inspector General. Because, we're crossing our Ts here, because this shit is crazy. And, I was... I mean, you can never be perfect, but, man, I was so freaking careful to make sure I wasn't getting fed some bullshit. "And the quality of people we talked to, if they ever go public, it'll blow your mind who we talked to. I mean, we're talking to some serious players that were like, confirmed by the Senate, you know, years ago, that we talked to, and I'll just leave it at that." (I think it's pretty obvious now that one of the people he was referring to was General James Clapper, who Grusch claimed had managing the crash retrieval program. Also, Clapper was confirmed by the Senate to be the Director of National Intelligence (2010) and Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence (2007), so he fits the bill.) Grusch: "I mean, I hope that they eventually go public. I understand the reputational hazards, their hazards to their legacy. They might have a slightly different thought process than me about protecting the information and what should be acknowledged. But, I think if they want to do the right thing before they kind of sunset, you know, in their lives, I think this would be a noble thing to do, if they're watching right now, and, you know, they know who they are. It'd be great, yeah."
3:54

🤐 Why Won't Firsthand Witnesses Speak? 🤫 "This is treason. What's the penalty for treason? Execution." 👽 Grusch: People I Interviewed and Sent to the IG, Saw the Bodies. 👽 Jesse - Jesse Michels: "You were also honest in the (2023) hearing, and definitively said you hadn't seen the bodies." Grusch: "Not personally, no." (So what did Grusch allegedly say to cause this reaction in the office of a member of Congress?) James Fox: "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." (Seen with his own eyes, meaning in videos, film or photos? If Grusch saw bodies and different morphologies on video or film, why not respond to Jesse's question like this? Grusch: "That is correct. I never went to any location and saw bodies in person." That would leave the door open for him seeing it on video, film or in photographs. If he later claims he saw bodies on video, film, or in photos, people will debate whether he changed his story or not. BTW, this is a great doc Yes Theory did on Grusch and so was the one Jesse did.) ~ Jesse: "So just people who, very-high trust, you had, sort of, you know, a lot of intersection with career-wise with them, and..." Grusch: "But they have. The people that I interviewed have, and they were some of the people that were interviewed by the Inspector General. Because, that was the thing, is like, you know, people are like, 'Oh, hearsay,' whatever. "Okay, I understand. Secondhand. I, literally, brought the people, firsthand, to the authorities. I'm just here as the meeting monkey, or the like, unifier, trying to bring everybody together and bring the people who do have that knowledge to the right people. So, yeah." Yes Theory: "Which feels also, that this [was] the perfect set of circumstances for you to be the one that blows the whistle, because firsthand knowledge would have put you in a completely different category of being able to disclose this stuff, right?" Grusch: "If I became subject of a non-disclosure agreement by becoming a firsthand guy, [that] actually would have hindered me, and I would have never been able to do this. I think about some stuff I was denied access to, and if I signed that non-disclosure agreement, I would have absolutely not been able to go public this. I would have been trapped." (If the gatekeepers could see the future and knew that Grusch was going to go public, they might have had him sign an NDA and showed him the alleged NHI craft and bodies in person, if they exist. Then we never would have heard from Grusch, and who knows where we'd be right now with disclosure. So, thanks, gatekeepers!) Grusch: "So, it's actually weird that my lack of that... But knowing the people that do, though, and I brought those people to the IG, is the only way I was able to get... So, the actual reprisal stuff and the access-denial stuff actually enhanced my ability to operate. "But I will tell you, I talked to these people in the program, they are just so afraid. Because the way it was enforced over the years, the threatening nature of some of their indoctrinations, where they're like, 'This is treason, you're going to Leavenworth if you EVER tell anybody not in the program. And, oh, by the way, what's the penalty for treason? Oh, right, execution, right?" Jesse: "Did you ever at any point try to suss out whether you were being lied to?" Grusch: "Oh, 100%." Jesse: "Because all of these people are coming from the same programs, and so, presumably there's some level of coordination between..." Grusch: "Ohhh!" Jesse: "So how do you kind of get through, and just make sure that they're not, you know, meeting in some back room saying, 'You say this to Dave, I'll say this to Dave'?" Grusch: "Yeah, no, for sure. So, like, I also went out of my way to find people who don't know each other, either, that like, you know, through methods like making sure I'm not getting circular reporting, not a part of some other kind of faction that might want to push a certain narrative out. "I had very higher-ranking colleagues of mine who were part of the same effort in their official capacity, go talk to other people that I didn't even personally talk to, to keep that separation, so they didn't know that they were feeding some of that information back to me. So I had a bunch of people go out, just to make sure I wasn't being targeted. I had other people conduct oral-history interviews. But they were getting the same information. "We took all that, and I'm like, all the people who conducted those interviews, I made them get interviewed by the Inspector General. Because, we're crossing our Ts here, because this shit is crazy. And, I was... I mean, you can never be perfect, but, man, I was so freaking careful to make sure I wasn't getting fed some bullshit. "And the quality of people we talked to, if they ever go public, it'll blow your mind who we talked to. I mean, we're talking to some serious players that were like, confirmed by the Senate, you know, years ago, that we talked to, and I'll just leave it at that." (I think it's pretty obvious now that one of the people he was referring to was General James Clapper, who Grusch claimed had managing the crash retrieval program. Also, Clapper was confirmed by the Senate to be the Director of National Intelligence (2010) and Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence (2007), so he fits the bill.) Grusch: "I mean, I hope that they eventually go public. I understand the reputational hazards, their hazards to their legacy. They might have a slightly different thought process than me about protecting the information and what should be acknowledged. But, I think if they want to do the right thing before they kind of sunset, you know, in their lives, I think this would be a noble thing to do, if they're watching right now, and, you know, they know who they are. It'd be great, yeah."

Joe Murgia

31,062 views • 2 months ago

The United States Government Is Corrupt To The Core, Our 3 Letter Agencies Are Using Our Tax Dollars To Bribe Politicians & Openly Rigging Elections PART 1: “I bribed Hillary Clinton $18 million. I facilitated a bribe for Hillary Clinton on January 14, 2016, right here in this town. On behalf of the FBI, they came to me around December 1, 2015. They told me Hillary Clinton had accepted a bribe from Turkey for $20 million. They told me that I would be working for a group in New York, FBI agents, who had authorization to set Hillary Clinton up in a sting. They asked me to facilitate a bribe for her, an 18 million dollar bribe from another government. The bag man from that other government was, I was to befriend and I was to get that person ten minutes alone in a room with Hillary Clinton. I did. On January 14, 2016, Hillary Clinton was in this town and she met in a way that was kept off her schedule. She accepted an 18 million dollar bribe. But General Barr knows this. This is the Durham, this is what is behind it all and I'll even tell you, I'm going to drop one more thing. I've been waiting to say this publicly. And this is what really happened. I will tell you, if you hear this and give me 90 seconds, your viewers will understand what's happened in the last five years in America. I've been waiting to say this on mainstream TV, and they will not have me back, because once they understood what this was about. I had Hillary Clinton, I caused Hillary Clinton, I facilitated a bribe, and she took a second bribe for $18 million. And I worked with the FBI as I did that. They're deeply involved in this. They came to me three days later and told me I had to forget about it and forget that it ever happened. And I said, what are you talking about? And they gave me one excuse. They said, Hillary's going to win and it's been decided upstairs nothing's going to be able to stop that now. So she's going to win and she's going to send her people over to the FBI and ask who was part of investigating Hillary and any of us who were part of it are going to be destroyed and that includes you too, Patrick and so this mission has been scrubbed from the highest level. And I thought about that and I said, yes, sir. And I came, but two or three weeks later I was back with three federal agents this time. Three federal agents. And I let them know that wasn't sitting, and this is in Salt Lake City, Utah, that that wasn't sitting well with me. And I'd like to know why we had almost a year before that. They told me.”
2:20

The United States Government Is Corrupt To The Core, Our 3 Letter Agencies Are Using Our Tax Dollars To Bribe Politicians & Openly Rigging Elections PART 1: “I bribed Hillary Clinton $18 million. I facilitated a bribe for Hillary Clinton on January 14, 2016, right here in this town. On behalf of the FBI, they came to me around December 1, 2015. They told me Hillary Clinton had accepted a bribe from Turkey for $20 million. They told me that I would be working for a group in New York, FBI agents, who had authorization to set Hillary Clinton up in a sting. They asked me to facilitate a bribe for her, an 18 million dollar bribe from another government. The bag man from that other government was, I was to befriend and I was to get that person ten minutes alone in a room with Hillary Clinton. I did. On January 14, 2016, Hillary Clinton was in this town and she met in a way that was kept off her schedule. She accepted an 18 million dollar bribe. But General Barr knows this. This is the Durham, this is what is behind it all and I'll even tell you, I'm going to drop one more thing. I've been waiting to say this publicly. And this is what really happened. I will tell you, if you hear this and give me 90 seconds, your viewers will understand what's happened in the last five years in America. I've been waiting to say this on mainstream TV, and they will not have me back, because once they understood what this was about. I had Hillary Clinton, I caused Hillary Clinton, I facilitated a bribe, and she took a second bribe for $18 million. And I worked with the FBI as I did that. They're deeply involved in this. They came to me three days later and told me I had to forget about it and forget that it ever happened. And I said, what are you talking about? And they gave me one excuse. They said, Hillary's going to win and it's been decided upstairs nothing's going to be able to stop that now. So she's going to win and she's going to send her people over to the FBI and ask who was part of investigating Hillary and any of us who were part of it are going to be destroyed and that includes you too, Patrick and so this mission has been scrubbed from the highest level. And I thought about that and I said, yes, sir. And I came, but two or three weeks later I was back with three federal agents this time. Three federal agents. And I let them know that wasn't sitting, and this is in Salt Lake City, Utah, that that wasn't sitting well with me. And I'd like to know why we had almost a year before that. They told me.”

Wall Street Apes

841,644 views • 2 years ago

"Imagine that there's a God who brings about the world and creates the world, but does it maliciously, because he wants human beings to suffer." ~AA Suffering Makes God's Existence Unlikely "Could God have made it such that animals were all herbivores instead of carnivores and omnivores?" "We're talking about animals who are predated on from the moment that they begin existence." (If you know about Loosh and "Far Journeys" by Robert Monroe, these points should all ring a bell. But this discussion was NOT about Loosh. Fascinating debate.) 1 Atheist vs 25 Christians (feat. Alex O'Connor) | Surrounded Christian Tim: "Okay, so my first question to start out with is: What exactly about suffering makes this unlikely, on the condition that God exists?" Atheist Alex (AA): "I think that if God is all-loving, then he probably wouldn't want his creatures to suffer. And so, I think that the fact that they do suffer makes his existence less likely." Tim: "Okay, perfect. And is there some specific aspect of suffering that you're particularly honing in on, horrendous or whatever that is?" Alex: "In particular, non-human animal suffering. Because I think that Christianity has a celebrated tradition of theodicies, trying to explain why suffering exists: human free will, the development of the soul, higher-order goods. All of this kind of stuff. None of which apply to the suffering of non-human animals." Tim: "Have you heard of the Axiological Expectation Mismatch Problem?" Alex: "I have not." Tim: "Okay, so, philosophers of religion have started to understand that the thing that actually generates a problem between God and suffering is actually the value system you attach to the very attribute of perfect lovingness. Because the problem of evil is an internal critique, you have to look at a very specific version of theism and how it defines perfect lovingness. I want to present to you a version where my version of perfect lovingness does not actually constitute a problem and a misalignment, that mismatch between the suffering of animals - let's just say, the profusion of suffering of animals - and existence of God." Alex: "So let's hear it. What kind of God are we imagining that would allow and oversee and do nothing to prevent billions of years of untold animal suffering?" (There's no justification for all of the suffering that animals go through and it's borderline comical (if it wasn't so sad) to see Christians trying to come up with reasons to justify it.) Tim: "Right. So you're talking about non-prevention." Alex: "Or setting up the system that is natural selection, such that it relies upon things like predation and disease." (This is straight out of the Loosh chapter.) Tim: "Well, the first part is, I don't agree with the whole setting up the system part. So I'm not one of those theists that believes that God does this select and pick idea of creating worlds. I don't think that God actually creates worlds. I think that God lets worlds develop, according in a certain way. But because God can oversee an overarching narrative, he knows exactly how he can redeem anything." Alex: "Could God have made it such that animals were all herbivores instead of carnivores and omnivores?" Tim: "Yes, he could totally do that." Alex: "So had he done that, here's an instant way to reduce, by orders of magnitude, the amount of suffering that exists." (But then there would be no Loosh! I don't know if Loosh is a real thing, but if it IS, it would explain lot of things on this planet.) Tim: "Right, but hold on. That's, particularly, assuming a value theory, already, that I haven't told you I'm adopting, that has a problem with evil. So I have to give you my value theory first, for you to show that misalignment." Alex: "Okay, let's hear it." Tim: "Perfect, okay. So my value theory says that the most important thing about a sentient creature is not what merely happens to them, it's about the total timeline of their life and how and where their life permanently ends. Meaning, if you were to judge an author of a narrative, and the first few chapters, let's say, there's a lot of bad things happening, but the end ends with this crescendo where there's victoriousness, there's redemption, there's beauty. And everyone in the story actually endorses their entire existence that they live. They can look at the total timeline, and they actually each subjectively come to the conclusion, 'I'm glad I was made and I totally see what my suffering was for.' That's the particular I'm using with. Like John Hicks says, we have to judge the very nature of God's lovingness by what he does in the end, not these few time slices that we observe right now. For you to show that there's a problem, you have to show, to me, that the suffering of animals cannot be transformed, are intrinsically cut off from being transformed into a life that they will endorse. There's a couple of theses on the table." Alex: "So are you talking about the end of their life, as in their end of life on Earth, or are you talking about the afterlife?" Tim: "Antemortem, postmortem (before and after death)." (So once that animal, that suffered needlessly for most of their life, gets to the afterlife, they'll understand there was a reason for it. Really?) Alex: "Okay. Because if you're just talking about life on Earth, then I would say that if you had an author writing a book and a character. If we were trying to figure out the relationship between that author and the person in the book, and that person in the book shows up for five seconds in the first chapter, and is a child who almost immediately dies of cancer in an incredibly painful way. And there's no development, there's no sort of bring back to life, and suddenly everyone's grateful for it. It is just this miserable, tragic experience. "And I ask, well, what did the author, not want to do for the story of the book, but want to do for that character? I think it would be pretty damning. And also, when it comes to animals, we're talking about animals who are predated on from the moment that they begin existence." Tim: "Absolutely." Alex: "They sort of have disease. Zebras, when they're killed by lions, are often too big to be killed instantly, so they die over minutes with their windpipes caught in the jaws of a lion. How can this be developing, a zebra, which, by the way, probably doesn't even have the same kind of first-person conscious experience that humans do in order to sort of rationalize an abstract and learn from their sort of past and morally develop in that way? They just suffer. And what kind of God could oversee this?" Tim:"Okay, so there's a lot of assumptions on the table. Again, you're assuming a particular value system that I'm not laying out." Alex: "I'll tell you what I'm assuming here. What I'm assuming here is that a good God would not allow unnecessary suffering to obtain. Would you agree with that?" Tim: "We can talk about unnecessary suffering. We're talking about the justifying norms for suffering. You're saying it has to be in terms of necessity. Which is, an evil is only authorizable, by God, if it's in connection to a greater good or prevention of a greater evil, correct?" Alex: "If there's some kind of justification for allowing that sort of thing." Tim: "Yeah, but you're saying it's a necessary connection. Why...what's the term necessity...?" Alex: "Perhaps I should say unjustified instead of unnecessary." Tim: "Okay, so we both agree. I do not believe that God can authorize or justify unjustified suffering." Alex: "Okay, so tell me how that example that I gave you, the deer with its leg, starving, is justified?" Tim: "Because it's intrinsically redeemable. And the norms I'm working with is not this necessity condition that you're working with. Mine is about redeemable suffering, redeemability, or what we call, feasibility." Alex: "For the deer?" Tim: "If that suffering can be defeated within the creature's life. And I'll define what I mean by defeat, which is that they can, retroactively, look back at what they went through and integrate it into their life history, where they look at their life..." Alex: "I have to interrupt, because the example I gave you is one where the deer dies." Tim: "Yes, the deer dies. But here's the thing. You're probably talking about, this post-mortem example, I'm gonna put one thesis on the table: There's two philosophers that defend exactly what this goes through. One defends that animals will be given a martyrdom status. Well, God will be able to present himself in a way to animals in the afterlife, such that, in the same way you could give praise to a dog and a dog emotionally recognizes that he's loved, and that his life is worth living, right? To these animals that suffered like that, there's one view on the table, which is that God will give them a praiseworthy status where they will be able to actually..." (Bending over backwards to justify the suffering of animals. The deer will learn why he/she had to go through all of that when they die and God explains it and praises the animal for what they went though. Ridiculous, IMO.) Alex: "So can we talk about that claim? Because these animals are suffering for what? I mean, God might cause them to suffer..." Tim: "It's not means to ends." Alex: "God might cause them to suffer a bunch, and then essentially redeem them in the afterlife. But what for? Like, why do this? If I were to punch you in the face and then give you $20,000 afterwards, you might be grateful for the $20,000, but why couldn't I just give you the $20,000?" Tim: "We'll see. So that's assuming. So I saw your debate with Trent..." Alex: "Good stuff." ~ Christian Hayden (Not Hayden Christiansen) : "Would you say that theism or atheism better account for the idea that suffering exists and a purpose for it?" Alex: "It depends exactly what you mean. Because, of course, you might say that the world itself is more expected on theism, and since suffering needs the existence of the world, that it's theism. But granted the existence of a material world, let's say, I think atheism." Hayden: "Okay. Why does suffering exist at all? In an atheistic worldview, what is the cause of suffering?" Alex: "Oh, well, because, however life began, it developed through a series of natural selection, which requires animals to develop senses that they wish to avoid in order to be more likely to survive. And that's why pain receptors evolve in a world where not all of these pains are actually going to kill us, we're left with situations left with situations in which we're in a lot of pain but don't end up dying for it." Hayden: "Would you agree that consciousness is necessary for suffering?" Alex: "I would say probably, yeah." Hayden: "Does atheism account for consciousness?" Alex: "Yes, that's what I was talking about a moment ago. Perhaps not, maybe theism accounts better for consciousness than atheism does." Hayden: "Okay. So if there is no consciousness, there is no suffering? Is that right?" Alex: "That's probably true, yeah." Hayden: "So, if atheism cannot account for consciousness, then it cannot account for suffering. Would you agree with that?" Alex: "So I think what we're doing here is we're sort of slightly shifting the goal posts. If you don't want to grant the existence of the material world before we start talking about this, we can do an argument from consciousness. But then we need to debate whether consciousness is more...it is explicable on atheism. "What I'm going to say is this: Consciousness may seem to imply the existence of a conscious creator of the Universe. We're here talking about, I suppose we're talking about Christianity. The claim was about God. But the God that you believe in, let's say, if we grant that there is a creator deity who sort of brings about the universe of conscious creatures... Have you ever heard of the evil-god hypothesis that Stephen Law popularized?" Hayden: No, tell me it." Alex: "So the idea is that like, imagine that there's a God who brings about the world and creates the world, but does it maliciously, because he wants human beings to suffer. He brings about a world in order so that human beings will suffer, right? That seems like a plausible hypothesis. And even if you think that consciousness points towards God, the kind of God that a lot of Christians think is a sort of necessary quality of God, which is to be all-loving, might not have to apply here." (I know he wasn't talking soul-trap theory and Loosh, but it sounds just like it.) Hayden: "If Christianity were true, is it plausible that suffering is necessary for God's purpose, for his creation?" Alex: "If Christianity is true, then I think it must be necessary, because there'd be no other explanation for it." Hayden: "So we're not talking about whether or not Christianity is true..." Alex: "But if you're asking me if it's plausible that Christianity is true and therefore suffering is necessary, I would say probably not. Because I don't think suffering should be necessary or could be necessary." Hayden: "In an atheistic worldview, I would agree with you. It makes no sense at all." Alex: "So can I ask you why then, if God exists and wants to come to know everybody, and wants to love everybody and does so for the sake of human beings, why he chose to imbue the world with so much suffering that is at least, seemingly, completely inexplicable?" Hayden: "Are you a father?" Alec: "No." Hayden: "I'm a father. I want my son to become just like I am, better than I am, I should say. I want him to become the best that he can be. Is it possible for him to become, to reach his potential, without suffering in his life?" Alex: "Perhaps not, but there's two..." Hayden: "So suffering is necessary." Alex: "There are a few things I want to say. Firstly, that kind of moral development doesn't apply to non-human animals, as I've already said, right?" Hayden: "Why not?" Alex: "That does not account for the brutal death of animals in the wild. Also if - I don't want to talk about your son, because it's tragic to think about, but - somebody else's son has suffered and died immediately as a result of that suffering, they don't get to develop in the same way." Hayden: "I would agree that on a micro level, it's very hard to justify. And we can ask the question, 'Why doesn't God intervene on all of these sufferings?" (Exactly. And that's the Christian making the point.) Alex: "You might be able to justify an amount of suffering, right? But the fact that there's so much gratuitous suffering in the world is what I think makes God's existence unlikely. There are some instances where maybe a certain amount of suffering brings about a certain amount of good in a situation. That, by the way, would count as a justification. But when a child dies of leukemia... And they'e dead." Hayden: "Could there be a purpose to it? What if the death of the child brings their parents to God?" Alex: "Then perhaps...then the parents should be grateful that their child got leukemia because it's doing the will of the Lord." Hayden: "Not necessarily." Alex: "That seems obscene to me." (Yep. What if the death of their child caused the grandmother to have a nervous breakdown, the mom to be riddled with guilt her entire life, and the father to go off the rails? That's my family, by the way. Before I was born, my 8-year-old sister was killed when my mom's car was stuck on the railroad tracks and the train hit the car. Seeing people trying to justify that as God's will or offering up reasons to justify it (as several people have done on here) is really sad. Sorry if that offends you.)
10:38

"Imagine that there's a God who brings about the world and creates the world, but does it maliciously, because he wants human beings to suffer." ~AA Suffering Makes God's Existence Unlikely "Could God have made it such that animals were all herbivores instead of carnivores and omnivores?" "We're talking about animals who are predated on from the moment that they begin existence." (If you know about Loosh and "Far Journeys" by Robert Monroe, these points should all ring a bell. But this discussion was NOT about Loosh. Fascinating debate.) 1 Atheist vs 25 Christians (feat. Alex O'Connor) | Surrounded Christian Tim: "Okay, so my first question to start out with is: What exactly about suffering makes this unlikely, on the condition that God exists?" Atheist Alex (AA): "I think that if God is all-loving, then he probably wouldn't want his creatures to suffer. And so, I think that the fact that they do suffer makes his existence less likely." Tim: "Okay, perfect. And is there some specific aspect of suffering that you're particularly honing in on, horrendous or whatever that is?" Alex: "In particular, non-human animal suffering. Because I think that Christianity has a celebrated tradition of theodicies, trying to explain why suffering exists: human free will, the development of the soul, higher-order goods. All of this kind of stuff. None of which apply to the suffering of non-human animals." Tim: "Have you heard of the Axiological Expectation Mismatch Problem?" Alex: "I have not." Tim: "Okay, so, philosophers of religion have started to understand that the thing that actually generates a problem between God and suffering is actually the value system you attach to the very attribute of perfect lovingness. Because the problem of evil is an internal critique, you have to look at a very specific version of theism and how it defines perfect lovingness. I want to present to you a version where my version of perfect lovingness does not actually constitute a problem and a misalignment, that mismatch between the suffering of animals - let's just say, the profusion of suffering of animals - and existence of God." Alex: "So let's hear it. What kind of God are we imagining that would allow and oversee and do nothing to prevent billions of years of untold animal suffering?" (There's no justification for all of the suffering that animals go through and it's borderline comical (if it wasn't so sad) to see Christians trying to come up with reasons to justify it.) Tim: "Right. So you're talking about non-prevention." Alex: "Or setting up the system that is natural selection, such that it relies upon things like predation and disease." (This is straight out of the Loosh chapter.) Tim: "Well, the first part is, I don't agree with the whole setting up the system part. So I'm not one of those theists that believes that God does this select and pick idea of creating worlds. I don't think that God actually creates worlds. I think that God lets worlds develop, according in a certain way. But because God can oversee an overarching narrative, he knows exactly how he can redeem anything." Alex: "Could God have made it such that animals were all herbivores instead of carnivores and omnivores?" Tim: "Yes, he could totally do that." Alex: "So had he done that, here's an instant way to reduce, by orders of magnitude, the amount of suffering that exists." (But then there would be no Loosh! I don't know if Loosh is a real thing, but if it IS, it would explain lot of things on this planet.) Tim: "Right, but hold on. That's, particularly, assuming a value theory, already, that I haven't told you I'm adopting, that has a problem with evil. So I have to give you my value theory first, for you to show that misalignment." Alex: "Okay, let's hear it." Tim: "Perfect, okay. So my value theory says that the most important thing about a sentient creature is not what merely happens to them, it's about the total timeline of their life and how and where their life permanently ends. Meaning, if you were to judge an author of a narrative, and the first few chapters, let's say, there's a lot of bad things happening, but the end ends with this crescendo where there's victoriousness, there's redemption, there's beauty. And everyone in the story actually endorses their entire existence that they live. They can look at the total timeline, and they actually each subjectively come to the conclusion, 'I'm glad I was made and I totally see what my suffering was for.' That's the particular I'm using with. Like John Hicks says, we have to judge the very nature of God's lovingness by what he does in the end, not these few time slices that we observe right now. For you to show that there's a problem, you have to show, to me, that the suffering of animals cannot be transformed, are intrinsically cut off from being transformed into a life that they will endorse. There's a couple of theses on the table." Alex: "So are you talking about the end of their life, as in their end of life on Earth, or are you talking about the afterlife?" Tim: "Antemortem, postmortem (before and after death)." (So once that animal, that suffered needlessly for most of their life, gets to the afterlife, they'll understand there was a reason for it. Really?) Alex: "Okay. Because if you're just talking about life on Earth, then I would say that if you had an author writing a book and a character. If we were trying to figure out the relationship between that author and the person in the book, and that person in the book shows up for five seconds in the first chapter, and is a child who almost immediately dies of cancer in an incredibly painful way. And there's no development, there's no sort of bring back to life, and suddenly everyone's grateful for it. It is just this miserable, tragic experience. "And I ask, well, what did the author, not want to do for the story of the book, but want to do for that character? I think it would be pretty damning. And also, when it comes to animals, we're talking about animals who are predated on from the moment that they begin existence." Tim: "Absolutely." Alex: "They sort of have disease. Zebras, when they're killed by lions, are often too big to be killed instantly, so they die over minutes with their windpipes caught in the jaws of a lion. How can this be developing, a zebra, which, by the way, probably doesn't even have the same kind of first-person conscious experience that humans do in order to sort of rationalize an abstract and learn from their sort of past and morally develop in that way? They just suffer. And what kind of God could oversee this?" Tim:"Okay, so there's a lot of assumptions on the table. Again, you're assuming a particular value system that I'm not laying out." Alex: "I'll tell you what I'm assuming here. What I'm assuming here is that a good God would not allow unnecessary suffering to obtain. Would you agree with that?" Tim: "We can talk about unnecessary suffering. We're talking about the justifying norms for suffering. You're saying it has to be in terms of necessity. Which is, an evil is only authorizable, by God, if it's in connection to a greater good or prevention of a greater evil, correct?" Alex: "If there's some kind of justification for allowing that sort of thing." Tim: "Yeah, but you're saying it's a necessary connection. Why...what's the term necessity...?" Alex: "Perhaps I should say unjustified instead of unnecessary." Tim: "Okay, so we both agree. I do not believe that God can authorize or justify unjustified suffering." Alex: "Okay, so tell me how that example that I gave you, the deer with its leg, starving, is justified?" Tim: "Because it's intrinsically redeemable. And the norms I'm working with is not this necessity condition that you're working with. Mine is about redeemable suffering, redeemability, or what we call, feasibility." Alex: "For the deer?" Tim: "If that suffering can be defeated within the creature's life. And I'll define what I mean by defeat, which is that they can, retroactively, look back at what they went through and integrate it into their life history, where they look at their life..." Alex: "I have to interrupt, because the example I gave you is one where the deer dies." Tim: "Yes, the deer dies. But here's the thing. You're probably talking about, this post-mortem example, I'm gonna put one thesis on the table: There's two philosophers that defend exactly what this goes through. One defends that animals will be given a martyrdom status. Well, God will be able to present himself in a way to animals in the afterlife, such that, in the same way you could give praise to a dog and a dog emotionally recognizes that he's loved, and that his life is worth living, right? To these animals that suffered like that, there's one view on the table, which is that God will give them a praiseworthy status where they will be able to actually..." (Bending over backwards to justify the suffering of animals. The deer will learn why he/she had to go through all of that when they die and God explains it and praises the animal for what they went though. Ridiculous, IMO.) Alex: "So can we talk about that claim? Because these animals are suffering for what? I mean, God might cause them to suffer..." Tim: "It's not means to ends." Alex: "God might cause them to suffer a bunch, and then essentially redeem them in the afterlife. But what for? Like, why do this? If I were to punch you in the face and then give you $20,000 afterwards, you might be grateful for the $20,000, but why couldn't I just give you the $20,000?" Tim: "We'll see. So that's assuming. So I saw your debate with Trent..." Alex: "Good stuff." ~ Christian Hayden (Not Hayden Christiansen) : "Would you say that theism or atheism better account for the idea that suffering exists and a purpose for it?" Alex: "It depends exactly what you mean. Because, of course, you might say that the world itself is more expected on theism, and since suffering needs the existence of the world, that it's theism. But granted the existence of a material world, let's say, I think atheism." Hayden: "Okay. Why does suffering exist at all? In an atheistic worldview, what is the cause of suffering?" Alex: "Oh, well, because, however life began, it developed through a series of natural selection, which requires animals to develop senses that they wish to avoid in order to be more likely to survive. And that's why pain receptors evolve in a world where not all of these pains are actually going to kill us, we're left with situations left with situations in which we're in a lot of pain but don't end up dying for it." Hayden: "Would you agree that consciousness is necessary for suffering?" Alex: "I would say probably, yeah." Hayden: "Does atheism account for consciousness?" Alex: "Yes, that's what I was talking about a moment ago. Perhaps not, maybe theism accounts better for consciousness than atheism does." Hayden: "Okay. So if there is no consciousness, there is no suffering? Is that right?" Alex: "That's probably true, yeah." Hayden: "So, if atheism cannot account for consciousness, then it cannot account for suffering. Would you agree with that?" Alex: "So I think what we're doing here is we're sort of slightly shifting the goal posts. If you don't want to grant the existence of the material world before we start talking about this, we can do an argument from consciousness. But then we need to debate whether consciousness is more...it is explicable on atheism. "What I'm going to say is this: Consciousness may seem to imply the existence of a conscious creator of the Universe. We're here talking about, I suppose we're talking about Christianity. The claim was about God. But the God that you believe in, let's say, if we grant that there is a creator deity who sort of brings about the universe of conscious creatures... Have you ever heard of the evil-god hypothesis that Stephen Law popularized?" Hayden: No, tell me it." Alex: "So the idea is that like, imagine that there's a God who brings about the world and creates the world, but does it maliciously, because he wants human beings to suffer. He brings about a world in order so that human beings will suffer, right? That seems like a plausible hypothesis. And even if you think that consciousness points towards God, the kind of God that a lot of Christians think is a sort of necessary quality of God, which is to be all-loving, might not have to apply here." (I know he wasn't talking soul-trap theory and Loosh, but it sounds just like it.) Hayden: "If Christianity were true, is it plausible that suffering is necessary for God's purpose, for his creation?" Alex: "If Christianity is true, then I think it must be necessary, because there'd be no other explanation for it." Hayden: "So we're not talking about whether or not Christianity is true..." Alex: "But if you're asking me if it's plausible that Christianity is true and therefore suffering is necessary, I would say probably not. Because I don't think suffering should be necessary or could be necessary." Hayden: "In an atheistic worldview, I would agree with you. It makes no sense at all." Alex: "So can I ask you why then, if God exists and wants to come to know everybody, and wants to love everybody and does so for the sake of human beings, why he chose to imbue the world with so much suffering that is at least, seemingly, completely inexplicable?" Hayden: "Are you a father?" Alec: "No." Hayden: "I'm a father. I want my son to become just like I am, better than I am, I should say. I want him to become the best that he can be. Is it possible for him to become, to reach his potential, without suffering in his life?" Alex: "Perhaps not, but there's two..." Hayden: "So suffering is necessary." Alex: "There are a few things I want to say. Firstly, that kind of moral development doesn't apply to non-human animals, as I've already said, right?" Hayden: "Why not?" Alex: "That does not account for the brutal death of animals in the wild. Also if - I don't want to talk about your son, because it's tragic to think about, but - somebody else's son has suffered and died immediately as a result of that suffering, they don't get to develop in the same way." Hayden: "I would agree that on a micro level, it's very hard to justify. And we can ask the question, 'Why doesn't God intervene on all of these sufferings?" (Exactly. And that's the Christian making the point.) Alex: "You might be able to justify an amount of suffering, right? But the fact that there's so much gratuitous suffering in the world is what I think makes God's existence unlikely. There are some instances where maybe a certain amount of suffering brings about a certain amount of good in a situation. That, by the way, would count as a justification. But when a child dies of leukemia... And they'e dead." Hayden: "Could there be a purpose to it? What if the death of the child brings their parents to God?" Alex: "Then perhaps...then the parents should be grateful that their child got leukemia because it's doing the will of the Lord." Hayden: "Not necessarily." Alex: "That seems obscene to me." (Yep. What if the death of their child caused the grandmother to have a nervous breakdown, the mom to be riddled with guilt her entire life, and the father to go off the rails? That's my family, by the way. Before I was born, my 8-year-old sister was killed when my mom's car was stuck on the railroad tracks and the train hit the car. Seeing people trying to justify that as God's will or offering up reasons to justify it (as several people have done on here) is really sad. Sorry if that offends you.)

Joe Murgia

12,708 views • 1 year ago

Quentin Tarantino wrote Butch in Pulp Fiction for Matt Dillon, but Dillon was unsure about the part. Tarantino needed another big-name actor alongside Harvey Keitel to get the film financed. Luckily, he was able to cast Bruce Willis in the role, he explains how. “We weren’t going out to Bruce Willis. Especially at that time, he was one of the top five, maybe even top three biggest stars in the world - He was definitely popular in America, but you go to Korea or somewhere like that - he was the man. What happened was, I originally wrote the part for Matt Dillon, because Matt Dillon was a fan of my script for Reservoir Dogs. The deal with Miramax was that we had an ensemble cast, but we needed at least one, if not two, Miramax-approved actors. After that, I could cast anybody I wanted, as long as there was somebody they considered a name that they could sell. Matt Dillon fell into the category of names they would accept. So I wrote it for Matt, and it seemed like getting him would be easy. But he read it and he wasn’t so sure. He liked it, but he was disturbed by the fact that you never actually see Butch boxing. He said, “I want to see the fight.” And maybe he didn’t one hundred percent get it. Also, he didn’t want to play that part. He wanted to play Vincent - that happened a lot. Any time I offered somebody a part, they wanted to play somebody else. So Matt didn’t say no, but he didn’t say yes. He still had to think about it. That was a little scary, because I thought I had him in the bag. With him, I had a go movie. Then all of a sudden, I didn’t have such a go movie anymore. Harvey Keitel, who's in the movie - he was one of the guys - so I had him. He was he was shooting in town. When he was shooting in town, he'd usually rent a house in Malibu. And so he would invite friends to come over for the weekend and hang out. And so I came over and I'm hanging out at Harvey's place. And then, well, it turns out that Bruce Willis was only living about three or four or five houses down the way. OK. And so I come over to Harvey's - and there's Bruce Willis. (1/2)
2:49

Quentin Tarantino wrote Butch in Pulp Fiction for Matt Dillon, but Dillon was unsure about the part. Tarantino needed another big-name actor alongside Harvey Keitel to get the film financed. Luckily, he was able to cast Bruce Willis in the role, he explains how. “We weren’t going out to Bruce Willis. Especially at that time, he was one of the top five, maybe even top three biggest stars in the world - He was definitely popular in America, but you go to Korea or somewhere like that - he was the man. What happened was, I originally wrote the part for Matt Dillon, because Matt Dillon was a fan of my script for Reservoir Dogs. The deal with Miramax was that we had an ensemble cast, but we needed at least one, if not two, Miramax-approved actors. After that, I could cast anybody I wanted, as long as there was somebody they considered a name that they could sell. Matt Dillon fell into the category of names they would accept. So I wrote it for Matt, and it seemed like getting him would be easy. But he read it and he wasn’t so sure. He liked it, but he was disturbed by the fact that you never actually see Butch boxing. He said, “I want to see the fight.” And maybe he didn’t one hundred percent get it. Also, he didn’t want to play that part. He wanted to play Vincent - that happened a lot. Any time I offered somebody a part, they wanted to play somebody else. So Matt didn’t say no, but he didn’t say yes. He still had to think about it. That was a little scary, because I thought I had him in the bag. With him, I had a go movie. Then all of a sudden, I didn’t have such a go movie anymore. Harvey Keitel, who's in the movie - he was one of the guys - so I had him. He was he was shooting in town. When he was shooting in town, he'd usually rent a house in Malibu. And so he would invite friends to come over for the weekend and hang out. And so I came over and I'm hanging out at Harvey's place. And then, well, it turns out that Bruce Willis was only living about three or four or five houses down the way. OK. And so I come over to Harvey's - and there's Bruce Willis. (1/2)

Gangster Cinema Central

1,197,855 views • 2 months ago

🇬🇧 In chains.. An ancient Briton stood before the slave empire of Rome. 🇮🇹 And asked them a question that shamed them into silence. ❓ His name was Caratacus. His people called themselves the Pretannoi. Greek explorers wrote their name down in 325 BC. The Romans would later call them Britanni. The name of this island was older than the empire that came to break it. ⚔️ In 43 AD, Rome invaded. Caratacus and his people fought. They lost their lands. But Caratacus did not stop. He fled west to the mountains of what is now Wales. He rallied two more tribes. The Silures and the Ordovices. For 9 years he fought Rome from the Welsh mountains. The Romans called him the most dangerous enemy in Britain. In 51 AD they finally cornered him. His army was destroyed. He fled north for sanctuary and was put in chains and given to Rome. They marched him 1,500 miles. His wife, his daughter, his brothers, all in chains. The Romans expected him to beg. They had heard the others beg. 🏛️ They brought him before the Roman Senate. The most powerful body of men in the known world. And one Briton stood before them in chains. He spoke: "Had your ancestors been more moderate, I might have come to this city as a friend, not a captive." "Why, when you wish to rule the world, must it follow that the world should welcome slavery?" "Grant me life, and I shall be an everlasting example of your mercy." The Senate sat in silence. Claudius ordered his chains struck off. The Briton who had fought Rome for 9 years would live the rest of his life a free man in the heart of it. He was the first Briton on record to refuse Slavery. He would not be the last. ⚖️ In 1772 a London court ruled no man could be held as a slave on English soil. ⚖️ In 1807 the House of Commons banned the slave trade. 🔥 The slave empire of Rome could not make the world welcome Slavery. And the British have been refusing it ever since. ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ 2,000 years on, his question still stands in us. Help us carry it further. 👇🙏 👉 👈 Be part of us. ☝️🇬🇧 Be Proud Of Us. 🙏🇬🇧
2:12

🇬🇧 In chains.. An ancient Briton stood before the slave empire of Rome. 🇮🇹 And asked them a question that shamed them into silence. ❓ His name was Caratacus. His people called themselves the Pretannoi. Greek explorers wrote their name down in 325 BC. The Romans would later call them Britanni. The name of this island was older than the empire that came to break it. ⚔️ In 43 AD, Rome invaded. Caratacus and his people fought. They lost their lands. But Caratacus did not stop. He fled west to the mountains of what is now Wales. He rallied two more tribes. The Silures and the Ordovices. For 9 years he fought Rome from the Welsh mountains. The Romans called him the most dangerous enemy in Britain. In 51 AD they finally cornered him. His army was destroyed. He fled north for sanctuary and was put in chains and given to Rome. They marched him 1,500 miles. His wife, his daughter, his brothers, all in chains. The Romans expected him to beg. They had heard the others beg. 🏛️ They brought him before the Roman Senate. The most powerful body of men in the known world. And one Briton stood before them in chains. He spoke: "Had your ancestors been more moderate, I might have come to this city as a friend, not a captive." "Why, when you wish to rule the world, must it follow that the world should welcome slavery?" "Grant me life, and I shall be an everlasting example of your mercy." The Senate sat in silence. Claudius ordered his chains struck off. The Briton who had fought Rome for 9 years would live the rest of his life a free man in the heart of it. He was the first Briton on record to refuse Slavery. He would not be the last. ⚖️ In 1772 a London court ruled no man could be held as a slave on English soil. ⚖️ In 1807 the House of Commons banned the slave trade. 🔥 The slave empire of Rome could not make the world welcome Slavery. And the British have been refusing it ever since. ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ 2,000 years on, his question still stands in us. Help us carry it further. 👇🙏 👉 👈 Be part of us. ☝️🇬🇧 Be Proud Of Us. 🙏🇬🇧

Proudofus.uk

98,951 views • 3 months ago

Ye narrative : I had this vision of performing Heil Hitler at the Grammys wearing a swastika t-shirt and crying because we broke down all the walls of censorship to break down all of the woes and Me Too and Cancel and all of these ideas between all of the tweets and the songs and the music and really, you know, all the threats, the threat of death, the non-threats of money and cutting off finances and all that happened and we went through this war to like really fight for our freedom as artists because you can't be artists if you can't tell the truth. You're no longer artists anymore. You're now a commodity. You're a slave. You have to say exactly what you're thinking and by you saying exactly what you're thinking, that's like, that's how the universe moves forward. God puts these ideas in our head that we have to blur out. I've been looked down and should've fallen so many times by controlled people for just saying what I actually felt even though there are a lot of people that felt very similar to that so that just being able to have these three words, nigger, hell, Hitler, and finally put it in three words that you wouldn't see together and to have been blessed to channel the greatest song that's been made to date, the energy, you know. When we make songs, like when I made Come to Life, it was the greatest song that had been made to date. When I made Moon, it was the greatest song that had been made to date. Like there's moments where I get into the right pocket around the right people and we channel these, we channel this. Like we made World War III. Like we definitely was leading towards moments like this with Hell, Hitler and this whole project now. Just super, man, I just, to God be the glory, I just feel so blessed to be able to be a channel, to be here with you, to be alive and I really, you know, the things that I'm doing, I'm not doing this to intentionally hurt anyone. I'm just telling my story and I'm telling my story as an artist and an entertainer. You understand what I'm saying? So if, since we can go watch Django and Leonardo DiCaprio say nigger 1,000 times in front of Black Excellence, in front of Jamie Foxx and Kerry Washington, then this is the character that I get into as an artist. Like cool, Daniel Day-Lewis. Like this, I don't know if y'all would say that this is breaking the fourth wall and it's coming to y'all, but I'm saying this is honestly, I'm always going to express on my heart what, you know, I'm always going to wear my heart on my sleeve. And it's so good to be able to get these ideas out. Now it's like, okay, this idea is out, it's been saved. There aren't ideas that I've been holding on to, you know. There aren't ideas that I've been saving and buying, because you're going to get more ideas. Sometimes people hold on to their ideas for life, they never get them out. You know, the ideas start to haunt them. These ideas are getting out. This drone idea, we're getting out these, we've got more dreams to get out. We're getting out these dreams, you know. So I just appreciate the people that stood by me in a time like this. Like people are out here really having to argue with people everywhere you go. You know, getting brutalized online. You know, how are you standing next to them? How are you allowing this? It's such an idea that people are supposed to be accompanying as a grown-ass, not just a grown-ass man, but a grown-ass boss. And be like, how are you allowing this? There's so much mind control, thought control, and a lack of freedom of speech. Do we need to play?
3:41

Ye narrative : I had this vision of performing Heil Hitler at the Grammys wearing a swastika t-shirt and crying because we broke down all the walls of censorship to break down all of the woes and Me Too and Cancel and all of these ideas between all of the tweets and the songs and the music and really, you know, all the threats, the threat of death, the non-threats of money and cutting off finances and all that happened and we went through this war to like really fight for our freedom as artists because you can't be artists if you can't tell the truth. You're no longer artists anymore. You're now a commodity. You're a slave. You have to say exactly what you're thinking and by you saying exactly what you're thinking, that's like, that's how the universe moves forward. God puts these ideas in our head that we have to blur out. I've been looked down and should've fallen so many times by controlled people for just saying what I actually felt even though there are a lot of people that felt very similar to that so that just being able to have these three words, nigger, hell, Hitler, and finally put it in three words that you wouldn't see together and to have been blessed to channel the greatest song that's been made to date, the energy, you know. When we make songs, like when I made Come to Life, it was the greatest song that had been made to date. When I made Moon, it was the greatest song that had been made to date. Like there's moments where I get into the right pocket around the right people and we channel these, we channel this. Like we made World War III. Like we definitely was leading towards moments like this with Hell, Hitler and this whole project now. Just super, man, I just, to God be the glory, I just feel so blessed to be able to be a channel, to be here with you, to be alive and I really, you know, the things that I'm doing, I'm not doing this to intentionally hurt anyone. I'm just telling my story and I'm telling my story as an artist and an entertainer. You understand what I'm saying? So if, since we can go watch Django and Leonardo DiCaprio say nigger 1,000 times in front of Black Excellence, in front of Jamie Foxx and Kerry Washington, then this is the character that I get into as an artist. Like cool, Daniel Day-Lewis. Like this, I don't know if y'all would say that this is breaking the fourth wall and it's coming to y'all, but I'm saying this is honestly, I'm always going to express on my heart what, you know, I'm always going to wear my heart on my sleeve. And it's so good to be able to get these ideas out. Now it's like, okay, this idea is out, it's been saved. There aren't ideas that I've been holding on to, you know. There aren't ideas that I've been saving and buying, because you're going to get more ideas. Sometimes people hold on to their ideas for life, they never get them out. You know, the ideas start to haunt them. These ideas are getting out. This drone idea, we're getting out these, we've got more dreams to get out. We're getting out these dreams, you know. So I just appreciate the people that stood by me in a time like this. Like people are out here really having to argue with people everywhere you go. You know, getting brutalized online. You know, how are you standing next to them? How are you allowing this? It's such an idea that people are supposed to be accompanying as a grown-ass, not just a grown-ass man, but a grown-ass boss. And be like, how are you allowing this? There's so much mind control, thought control, and a lack of freedom of speech. Do we need to play?

YEFANATICS

117,485 views • 1 year ago

Sora 2 has the capabilities to make an entire anime episode with time and effort. This is a turning point for generative AI models and it is terrifying to think what is next to come. The difference between Sora and Sora 2 is absolutely staggering. Yes, this looks cool. I put the time into it to make it as close to art as possible. This was not simple to make and not just prompting and throwing it in some editor. Every frame is generated of another scene and even the reference image for characters I used to start this project were AI generated. This was all created with 10 second clips pulled apart and chunked out into the final product. Regardless of the imagery you see, I did not directly use any artist's art for this video. This 10-minute video was generated over the course of a week from more than 700 text prompts. It was built on technology trained by scraping the uncredited, uncompensated contributions of countless human artists and animators. The creation of this single video consumed an enormous amount of energy and water, equivalent to powering a home for days and requiring hundreds of liters of fresh water for cooling. But that is nothing. In the 10 minutes you spend watching this, the global network of AI video generators will create over 6,250 more short videos. The combined energy required for that 10 minutes of global creation is enough to power an average household for nearly 2 years. - It's a double-edged sword. While AI uses immense amount of energy has clear immoral issues with scalping the hard work of artists, this also provides those a medium who have potentially spent their life attempting to draw out the ideas in their head and failing to grasp it. My sister is an artist, I grew up always attempting to draw but never could get the image in my head on paper, I've spent the better part of over 20 years to teach myself through watching videos and practice, however I don't have steady hands and frankly have just been unable to make any vision come to life. Which brings me to the conflict here. This would have been a dream of mine to be able to get frames created and flesh out the story in my head. To make this video professionally, it would be an absurd amount of money. A small studio by itself would be over a million dollars just to start up. To hire a studio would be most likely over ~200k. I would love to make this story I have in my head through legit and traditional means, I would love to start a Kickstarter to get funding and hire artists, voice actors, and a production team. However I know that would most likely be an impossible reach that would further fuel the hate. Regardless, I understand the worry this causes. The fear this produces. However, we can't just ignore where AI is currently at and just tell people not to use it or even worse threaten people who use it. People will always use the shiny new toy in front of them, so the real question is how do we either make it work for us and work along side it, or how do we ACTUALLY implement a method to protect art rather than tell people to not use it. Respect your artists. Review their ToS and don't upload their hard work to a model without permission.
10:33

Sora 2 has the capabilities to make an entire anime episode with time and effort. This is a turning point for generative AI models and it is terrifying to think what is next to come. The difference between Sora and Sora 2 is absolutely staggering. Yes, this looks cool. I put the time into it to make it as close to art as possible. This was not simple to make and not just prompting and throwing it in some editor. Every frame is generated of another scene and even the reference image for characters I used to start this project were AI generated. This was all created with 10 second clips pulled apart and chunked out into the final product. Regardless of the imagery you see, I did not directly use any artist's art for this video. This 10-minute video was generated over the course of a week from more than 700 text prompts. It was built on technology trained by scraping the uncredited, uncompensated contributions of countless human artists and animators. The creation of this single video consumed an enormous amount of energy and water, equivalent to powering a home for days and requiring hundreds of liters of fresh water for cooling. But that is nothing. In the 10 minutes you spend watching this, the global network of AI video generators will create over 6,250 more short videos. The combined energy required for that 10 minutes of global creation is enough to power an average household for nearly 2 years. - It's a double-edged sword. While AI uses immense amount of energy has clear immoral issues with scalping the hard work of artists, this also provides those a medium who have potentially spent their life attempting to draw out the ideas in their head and failing to grasp it. My sister is an artist, I grew up always attempting to draw but never could get the image in my head on paper, I've spent the better part of over 20 years to teach myself through watching videos and practice, however I don't have steady hands and frankly have just been unable to make any vision come to life. Which brings me to the conflict here. This would have been a dream of mine to be able to get frames created and flesh out the story in my head. To make this video professionally, it would be an absurd amount of money. A small studio by itself would be over a million dollars just to start up. To hire a studio would be most likely over ~200k. I would love to make this story I have in my head through legit and traditional means, I would love to start a Kickstarter to get funding and hire artists, voice actors, and a production team. However I know that would most likely be an impossible reach that would further fuel the hate. Regardless, I understand the worry this causes. The fear this produces. However, we can't just ignore where AI is currently at and just tell people not to use it or even worse threaten people who use it. People will always use the shiny new toy in front of them, so the real question is how do we either make it work for us and work along side it, or how do we ACTUALLY implement a method to protect art rather than tell people to not use it. Respect your artists. Review their ToS and don't upload their hard work to a model without permission.

LUͦʷCͦk

18,609 views • 11 months ago