Sensitive content

This media may contain sensitive content.

Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

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

Poor thing couldn't handle all that BBC bnwobsessed# #Alt,Amateur, slut,Hardcore,Interracial,Interview,Moaning,Tattoo,pounding

Goth Girls Alt Punk Emo Cuties Fucked Sexy Porn

187,929 subscribers

233,346 views • 23 days ago •via X (Twitter)

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

Here's video of Kara Swisher and Scott Galloway just a couple weeks ago defending Graham Platner and saying that Platner's past should not matter at all. They defended the nazi tattoo, the obscene posts, the sexting, all of it. Swisher (a self-proclaimed strong feminist) said that Platner reminded him of Bill Clinton because Clinton made some mistakes but was a good President. Galloway (a Jew) gave Platner a "hall pass" for his nazi tattoo. The only thing that matters to the Left is power. When you see them outraged about anything, remember they truly do not care. It is all performative. These two frauds have both accused Elon Musk of making nazi gestures. Galloway once said he couldn't drive a Tesla anymore because a joke Musk made could be interpreted as homophobic. Two terrible people.

Here's video of Kara Swisher and Scott Galloway just a couple weeks ago defending Graham Platner and saying that Platner's past should not matter at all. They defended the nazi tattoo, the obscene posts, the sexting, all of it. Swisher (a self-proclaimed strong feminist) said that Platner reminded him of Bill Clinton because Clinton made some mistakes but was a good President. Galloway (a Jew) gave Platner a "hall pass" for his nazi tattoo. The only thing that matters to the Left is power. When you see them outraged about anything, remember they truly do not care. It is all performative. These two frauds have both accused Elon Musk of making nazi gestures. Galloway once said he couldn't drive a Tesla anymore because a joke Musk made could be interpreted as homophobic. Two terrible people.

MAZE

569,829 views • 2 months ago

Jacob Coxon’s next interview on BBC (the ex-Anthropic+OpenAI researcher who resigned). "If we don't slow down at the current rate of progress, there is a strong chance that we could all die in the immediate future. It's not at all an exaggeration. And many of the people who are deep in the weeds and actually coding the thing, believe that there is a greater than 10% chance for a probability that humans might die. And they all keep this in their head on a daily basis while working on the technology." --- Full video link in comment.

Jacob Coxon’s next interview on BBC (the ex-Anthropic+OpenAI researcher who resigned). "If we don't slow down at the current rate of progress, there is a strong chance that we could all die in the immediate future. It's not at all an exaggeration. And many of the people who are deep in the weeds and actually coding the thing, believe that there is a greater than 10% chance for a probability that humans might die. And they all keep this in their head on a daily basis while working on the technology." --- Full video link in comment.

Rohan Paul

123,473 views • 10 days ago

QTCinderella got emotional talking about how much Swift helped her through life's toughest moments 🥺💔 “I was SA'd from the ages 6-10, bullied growing up.. I was in an abusive relationship.. Then my mom died.. Something I had through the majority of all those things was my lil guy." "The thing that made it better for me for 15 years I've lost.. My world kind of came crashing down around me in a way I couldn't handle anymore.”

QTCinderella got emotional talking about how much Swift helped her through life's toughest moments 🥺💔 “I was SA'd from the ages 6-10, bullied growing up.. I was in an abusive relationship.. Then my mom died.. Something I had through the majority of all those things was my lil guy." "The thing that made it better for me for 15 years I've lost.. My world kind of came crashing down around me in a way I couldn't handle anymore.”

bloom 𖧧

347,920 views • 3 months ago

This is why it is not good to tell lies. President Tinubu Bola Ahmed Tinubu said when he came to office, 27 states couldn't pay salaries, but today they have more money and no state is owing salaries. Now, pensioners of Lagos under the Nigerian Union of Pensioners have responded by entering the streets of Lagos to ask questions; if you have more money, how come we are not being paid after we worked all our lives? Lmao... The good thing about this is that it started from his Lagos state. And more states will join. All that their arguments of state getting more money fell facedown flat. Alhaji Atiku Abubakar Abubakar have scattered all their lies with just one TV interview😂

This is why it is not good to tell lies. President Tinubu Bola Ahmed Tinubu said when he came to office, 27 states couldn't pay salaries, but today they have more money and no state is owing salaries. Now, pensioners of Lagos under the Nigerian Union of Pensioners have responded by entering the streets of Lagos to ask questions; if you have more money, how come we are not being paid after we worked all our lives? Lmao... The good thing about this is that it started from his Lagos state. And more states will join. All that their arguments of state getting more money fell facedown flat. Alhaji Atiku Abubakar Abubakar have scattered all their lies with just one TV interview😂

Samuel Omogor

22,324 views • 29 days ago

Martin Scorsese on the difference between his crime films and Francis Ford Coppola’s Godfather films: “All I know is, like, on the street corner—the corner stuff, nickels and dimes kind of thing. His is more of a book. “If we’re talking about The Godfather, we’re talking about Mario Puzo’s original novel, and then the incredible Godfather II, one of the greatest ever made. I think number two just feels like grand opera. It’s something else entirely. I never had any experience of that. I may have seen it from afar. “But the kind of experience I know: the poor guys on the corner selling the wrong lenses that they just stole, you know. I did that sort of thing.” Quote taken from Scorsese’s interview with Charlie Rose. Clip taken from The Godfather Part II.

Martin Scorsese on the difference between his crime films and Francis Ford Coppola’s Godfather films: “All I know is, like, on the street corner—the corner stuff, nickels and dimes kind of thing. His is more of a book. “If we’re talking about The Godfather, we’re talking about Mario Puzo’s original novel, and then the incredible Godfather II, one of the greatest ever made. I think number two just feels like grand opera. It’s something else entirely. I never had any experience of that. I may have seen it from afar. “But the kind of experience I know: the poor guys on the corner selling the wrong lenses that they just stole, you know. I did that sort of thing.” Quote taken from Scorsese’s interview with Charlie Rose. Clip taken from The Godfather Part II.

Gangster Cinema Central

35,548 views • 1 month ago

Elon Musk: Starship is next-level. It's the first rocket that can take us to Mars. “Starship is the most complex and advanced rocket that's ever been made by, I don't know, an order of magnitude or something like that. It's a lot. It's really next-level. The fundamental optimization of Starship is minimizing cost per ton to orbit and ultimately cost per ton to the surface of Mars. This may seem like a mercantile objective, but it is actually the thing that needs to be optimized. There is a certain cost per ton to the surface of Mars where we can afford to establish a self-sustaining city, and then above that we cannot afford to do it. Right now, you couldn't fly to Mars for a trillion dollars. No amount of money could get you a ticket to Mars. So, we need to get that to something that is actually possible at all.” From: Interview with Lex Fridman, December 28, 2021

Elon Musk: Starship is next-level. It's the first rocket that can take us to Mars. “Starship is the most complex and advanced rocket that's ever been made by, I don't know, an order of magnitude or something like that. It's a lot. It's really next-level. The fundamental optimization of Starship is minimizing cost per ton to orbit and ultimately cost per ton to the surface of Mars. This may seem like a mercantile objective, but it is actually the thing that needs to be optimized. There is a certain cost per ton to the surface of Mars where we can afford to establish a self-sustaining city, and then above that we cannot afford to do it. Right now, you couldn't fly to Mars for a trillion dollars. No amount of money could get you a ticket to Mars. So, we need to get that to something that is actually possible at all.” From: Interview with Lex Fridman, December 28, 2021

ELON CLIPS

1,190,697 views • 1 year ago

😡 Jenas ANGRILY HITS OUT At GMB Hosts: Throws Tantrum Over Ranvir’s Tough Questions & Plays Victim Again 🤔 Jermaine Jenas is back moaning about his Good Morning Britain interview, claiming it was a big bad trap and an ambush he never saw coming. The ex-Match of the Day star, still licking his wounds from the 2024 sexting scandal that cost him his BBC gigs, took to social media to play the victim card once more: “There’s obviously a level of disappointment… It felt like they had an agenda. It felt like there was a thirst for blood from one presenter in particular… It just felt unnecessary to me.” He goes on to complain that producers promised to focus on his “rebuilding” journey, but it all went wrong: “They invited me on. I didn’t ask to go on the show… It just felt like a trap. It just felt like one individual had an agenda and she was going to twist the knife because she wanted to.” Yeah, because no one could possibly have predicted that going on GMB with Kate Garraway and Ranvir Singh would involve tough questions about the scandal that got you sacked. Come on Jermaine. You’re not stupid. You knew exactly how this was going to go, and you’re clearly referring to Ranvir when talking about the “agenda”, “thirst for blood” and “twisting the knife”. Why not just say her name? Just be honest for once. We all know who you’re talking about. Instead of owning it, he’s back to the same “poor me, everyone’s out to get me” routine he pulled during the interview itself. You lost your jobs and damaged your family because of your own actions, Jenas. Time to stop the endless whining and actually move on, or at least stop agreeing to interviews if you can’t handle the heat.

😡 Jenas ANGRILY HITS OUT At GMB Hosts: Throws Tantrum Over Ranvir’s Tough Questions & Plays Victim Again 🤔 Jermaine Jenas is back moaning about his Good Morning Britain interview, claiming it was a big bad trap and an ambush he never saw coming. The ex-Match of the Day star, still licking his wounds from the 2024 sexting scandal that cost him his BBC gigs, took to social media to play the victim card once more: “There’s obviously a level of disappointment… It felt like they had an agenda. It felt like there was a thirst for blood from one presenter in particular… It just felt unnecessary to me.” He goes on to complain that producers promised to focus on his “rebuilding” journey, but it all went wrong: “They invited me on. I didn’t ask to go on the show… It just felt like a trap. It just felt like one individual had an agenda and she was going to twist the knife because she wanted to.” Yeah, because no one could possibly have predicted that going on GMB with Kate Garraway and Ranvir Singh would involve tough questions about the scandal that got you sacked. Come on Jermaine. You’re not stupid. You knew exactly how this was going to go, and you’re clearly referring to Ranvir when talking about the “agenda”, “thirst for blood” and “twisting the knife”. Why not just say her name? Just be honest for once. We all know who you’re talking about. Instead of owning it, he’s back to the same “poor me, everyone’s out to get me” routine he pulled during the interview itself. You lost your jobs and damaged your family because of your own actions, Jenas. Time to stop the endless whining and actually move on, or at least stop agreeing to interviews if you can’t handle the heat.

J Stewart

212,259 views • 3 months ago

"This Gear Solved A Problem Most Engineers Couldn't Handle" At first, engineers thought gears only needed one thing. Teeth that mesh. But when factories started running bigger machines at higher torque and speed, something strange happened. The gears sounded like metal hammers smashing together. Vibration exploded. Bearings wore out faster. Entire systems became unstable. Then came the herringbone gear. Instead of straight teeth slamming together all at once, its angled double-helical design transfers force gradually across the surface. Smoother contact. Less shock. Almost silent operation. But here's the genius part most people miss. Normal helical gears create massive sideways axial thrust that pushes shafts apart under load. Herringbone gears cancel that force completely by using mirrored tooth geometry. No extra thrust bearings. Less wear. Higher load capacity. That's why you'll find them inside marine propulsion systems, heavy industrial gearboxes, and oil-field machinery where failure is not an option. The crazy part? Engineers still avoid them because manufacturing these gears is brutally expensive. Which brings us back to the question... if regular gears already work, why build the impossible one?

"This Gear Solved A Problem Most Engineers Couldn't Handle" At first, engineers thought gears only needed one thing. Teeth that mesh. But when factories started running bigger machines at higher torque and speed, something strange happened. The gears sounded like metal hammers smashing together. Vibration exploded. Bearings wore out faster. Entire systems became unstable. Then came the herringbone gear. Instead of straight teeth slamming together all at once, its angled double-helical design transfers force gradually across the surface. Smoother contact. Less shock. Almost silent operation. But here's the genius part most people miss. Normal helical gears create massive sideways axial thrust that pushes shafts apart under load. Herringbone gears cancel that force completely by using mirrored tooth geometry. No extra thrust bearings. Less wear. Higher load capacity. That's why you'll find them inside marine propulsion systems, heavy industrial gearboxes, and oil-field machinery where failure is not an option. The crazy part? Engineers still avoid them because manufacturing these gears is brutally expensive. Which brings us back to the question... if regular gears already work, why build the impossible one?

Mechanical Knowledge

269,183 views • 4 months ago

Orson Welles on whether horror comics and violent films cause juvenile delinquency: During a television interview, Orson Welles rejected the idea that violent entertainment was responsible for juvenile delinquency, arguing that it confused a symptom with the underlying cause. "I don't think that horror films or horror comics contribute to juvenile delinquency. I think that they may encourage psychotics and homicidal and other dangerous types, but juvenile delinquency is, I think, a symptom of the illness of our age." According to Welles, the roots of the problem lay elsewhere. "It doesn't come from a lack of playgrounds or bad comic books, but of a great longing for youth to have something to rebel against." When asked whether children simply imitate what they see in books and films, Welles pointed to history as evidence against that idea. "If they were, they would have come from the bear pits and the Globe Theater and committed some rather extraordinary acts in the Elizabethan era." His argument was that audiences have consumed violent stories for centuries without those works producing widespread imitation. Welles also defended violence as a legitimate part of great storytelling. "I think that all vital periods of the drama and of literature are periods of great violence, and that all of our great plays and novels are violent." But he drew a clear distinction between meaningful art and sensationalism. "I don't like them when they are poor novels or when they are not works of art; they become shy and seem to be pandering." When the interviewer suggested that westerns at least allow virtue to triumph — unlike many horror stories — Welles disagreed. "I don't think so, no. Not always. Well, it doesn't in Edgar Allan Poe either, you know." Source: Orson Welles Sketch Book / BBC television interview with Huw Wheldon (1955)

Orson Welles on whether horror comics and violent films cause juvenile delinquency: During a television interview, Orson Welles rejected the idea that violent entertainment was responsible for juvenile delinquency, arguing that it confused a symptom with the underlying cause. "I don't think that horror films or horror comics contribute to juvenile delinquency. I think that they may encourage psychotics and homicidal and other dangerous types, but juvenile delinquency is, I think, a symptom of the illness of our age." According to Welles, the roots of the problem lay elsewhere. "It doesn't come from a lack of playgrounds or bad comic books, but of a great longing for youth to have something to rebel against." When asked whether children simply imitate what they see in books and films, Welles pointed to history as evidence against that idea. "If they were, they would have come from the bear pits and the Globe Theater and committed some rather extraordinary acts in the Elizabethan era." His argument was that audiences have consumed violent stories for centuries without those works producing widespread imitation. Welles also defended violence as a legitimate part of great storytelling. "I think that all vital periods of the drama and of literature are periods of great violence, and that all of our great plays and novels are violent." But he drew a clear distinction between meaningful art and sensationalism. "I don't like them when they are poor novels or when they are not works of art; they become shy and seem to be pandering." When the interviewer suggested that westerns at least allow virtue to triumph — unlike many horror stories — Welles disagreed. "I don't think so, no. Not always. Well, it doesn't in Edgar Allan Poe either, you know." Source: Orson Welles Sketch Book / BBC television interview with Huw Wheldon (1955)

History Nerd

11,070 views • 2 months ago

"That's why they couldn't find anything at [MIT] Lincoln [Labs]. They said, 'Your orders were to give everything back.'" ~Corso 🛸 Corso: Lincoln Labs Analyzed Material from Roswell 🛸 (Will this Lincoln Labs (LL) recording of Edward Ruppelt's "flying saucer talk" that Rep. Eric Burlison requested be interesting? Sure. But don't expect a smoking gun. The more important question: Did LL handle any material allegedly from a UAP? Or Roswell? According to Col. Phillip J. Corso, the answer is YES. But... H/T: Jeremy Kenyon Lockyer Corbell and George Knapp Corso: "Anything like the first flying-saucer stuff (from Roswell) would all come in to me." George Knapp: "Other than that first batch, was there more?" Corso: "No. I never got anything more than that first batch." Dr. Hal Puthoff: "Were there reports in the files from when they had originally been looked at?" Corso: "Somebody had done something with them, because there's reports in there." Puthoff: "Do you remember which labs had written the reports?" Corso: "Well, the labs weren't ours then, in those days. And I remember what Walter Reed told me, and Lincoln Lab told me. They said, 'Do you remember your instructions were always not to keep any copies, to send everything back?' And they had to... That's why they couldn't find anything at Lincoln. They said, 'Your orders were to give everything back, and those were our entire instructions.' "What this would cause: All weapons will be obsolete." (Jeremy told me that there's another Knapp interview with Corso where the late colonel mentions Canadian, Wilbert Smith, and MIT Lincoln Labs doing the analysis and providing a report. Corso also mentions Gen. Arthur Trudeau who urged Corso to get the best engineers and go, "see anybody that thinks they can do it." I assume that means: try to reverse engineer the tech/materials.)

"That's why they couldn't find anything at [MIT] Lincoln [Labs]. They said, 'Your orders were to give everything back.'" ~Corso 🛸 Corso: Lincoln Labs Analyzed Material from Roswell 🛸 (Will this Lincoln Labs (LL) recording of Edward Ruppelt's "flying saucer talk" that Rep. Eric Burlison requested be interesting? Sure. But don't expect a smoking gun. The more important question: Did LL handle any material allegedly from a UAP? Or Roswell? According to Col. Phillip J. Corso, the answer is YES. But... H/T: Jeremy Kenyon Lockyer Corbell and George Knapp Corso: "Anything like the first flying-saucer stuff (from Roswell) would all come in to me." George Knapp: "Other than that first batch, was there more?" Corso: "No. I never got anything more than that first batch." Dr. Hal Puthoff: "Were there reports in the files from when they had originally been looked at?" Corso: "Somebody had done something with them, because there's reports in there." Puthoff: "Do you remember which labs had written the reports?" Corso: "Well, the labs weren't ours then, in those days. And I remember what Walter Reed told me, and Lincoln Lab told me. They said, 'Do you remember your instructions were always not to keep any copies, to send everything back?' And they had to... That's why they couldn't find anything at Lincoln. They said, 'Your orders were to give everything back, and those were our entire instructions.' "What this would cause: All weapons will be obsolete." (Jeremy told me that there's another Knapp interview with Corso where the late colonel mentions Canadian, Wilbert Smith, and MIT Lincoln Labs doing the analysis and providing a report. Corso also mentions Gen. Arthur Trudeau who urged Corso to get the best engineers and go, "see anybody that thinks they can do it." I assume that means: try to reverse engineer the tech/materials.)

Joe Murgia

33,205 views • 3 months ago

One common reason why traders blow up is because of poor position sizing. In other words, how much do you bet on a trade. You can be right on direction 60% of the time and still lose everything if you size your positions poorly. One oversized trade can wipe out months of gains. This is why position sizing is a big part of risk management. Sandeep Rao - SEBI Reg. RA🖖 recently spoke to Tom Basso, one of the original Market Wizards, to discuss his approach to trading. I was listening to the interview and the one thing that stood out to me was how Tom's thinking on position sizing evolved over decades. He started simple: risk the same percentage of equity on every trade, inspired by Larry Hite's philosophy that every bet should be equal in terms of potential loss. But then came a silver trade with explosive volatility. Clients were calling, nervous about the wild swings. So he realized it wasn't just about the amount you could lose—it was also about the speed of movement. High volatility creates psychological stress that leads to poor decisions. So he added a second layer: volatility as a percentage of equity. Now he'd calculate both risk % and volatility %, then take the smaller of the two. Then came the third refinement: margin-to-equity ratios. Some markets have deceptively low risk and volatility but require high margin because of sudden jump risk. By incorporating all three factors, he never got caught overexposed. The result was a position sizing system that automatically scales down when markets get too volatile, protects against margin squeezes, and keeps portfolio risk in check. It's really interesting conversation. Link to the full interview is in the comments.

One common reason why traders blow up is because of poor position sizing. In other words, how much do you bet on a trade. You can be right on direction 60% of the time and still lose everything if you size your positions poorly. One oversized trade can wipe out months of gains. This is why position sizing is a big part of risk management. Sandeep Rao - SEBI Reg. RA🖖 recently spoke to Tom Basso, one of the original Market Wizards, to discuss his approach to trading. I was listening to the interview and the one thing that stood out to me was how Tom's thinking on position sizing evolved over decades. He started simple: risk the same percentage of equity on every trade, inspired by Larry Hite's philosophy that every bet should be equal in terms of potential loss. But then came a silver trade with explosive volatility. Clients were calling, nervous about the wild swings. So he realized it wasn't just about the amount you could lose—it was also about the speed of movement. High volatility creates psychological stress that leads to poor decisions. So he added a second layer: volatility as a percentage of equity. Now he'd calculate both risk % and volatility %, then take the smaller of the two. Then came the third refinement: margin-to-equity ratios. Some markets have deceptively low risk and volatility but require high margin because of sudden jump risk. By incorporating all three factors, he never got caught overexposed. The result was a position sizing system that automatically scales down when markets get too volatile, protects against margin squeezes, and keeps portfolio risk in check. It's really interesting conversation. Link to the full interview is in the comments.

Nithin Kamath

59,296 views • 9 months ago

Yale grad and professor Jiang Xueqin: "These Epstein... emails... illuminate... how power works... the elite [are]... all friends with each other... [and stick] together... through... secret society rituals... [so] the entire American elite are just a bunch of pedophiles." This clip of Xueqin (Jiang Xueqin), known in large part because of his Predictive History YouTube channel, is taken from an interview with Danny Haiphong (Danny Haiphong) posted to Haiphong's eponymous YouTube channel on November 14, 2025. ----------------Partial transcription of clip--------------- "So these Epstein files, these emails, they're being released, and they're really enlightening and they really illuminate for us how power works. So I will give a structural overview of what these emails reveal to us, okay? "The first thing it reveals to us is that all these people in power, the elite, they're all friends with each other. So in public, the Democrats and Republicans, they can be fighting each other, but in reality, they go to the same schools, they go to the same parties. They— they're just friends with each other. So what you're seeing in public is sort of like, political struggle in public. It's all just fake. It's like wrestling. It's reality TV. These— the elite are all friends with each other. "That's the first thing. Second thing that we've noticed about the emails is how cavalier the elite are. They think that they're above everyone else. They think they're untouchable, so they just speak their minds freely. I mean, Jeffrey Epstein, he was using Gmail in order to make all these sensitive communications. There was absolutely no operational security. He didn't really care because he believed he was untouchable. And that's how the elite think and behave. They live in a bubble. They think that they control the world, and they're untouchable, so they can do whatever they want. And all that matters is staying within this bubble, staying close to each other. "The third thing I will say is that these emails don't tell us, but we can assume that there are many layers of networking among the elite. So Jeffrey Epstein, why was he so popular among the elite? Well, I mean, first of all, he was just a friendly guy who did a lot of networking and was able to bring the elite together. But if you look at go to Epstein island, you will find that there's a temple there that's almost designed for ritual sacrifice. "So, what I've researched and what I've discovered is that the way that the elite stay together is through rituals, secret society rituals. Why? Because at the end of the day, if you're part of the elite, your biggest problem is trust. How can you trust that person to not rat you out in this political struggle? And the answer is, well, you blackmail each other, right? So, so you do acts together that we consider taboo, including, you know, s— with underage children. I mean, there are lots of transgressions that you can do. And the more transgressions you do, the more cohesive the elite is. "So, unfortunately, if you dig deeper into Jeffrey Epstein, what you'll find is a lot of transgressions, both sexual and violent as well. Bring these social taboos— I mean... what's really astonishing about the Jeffrey Epstein case is that slowly the inner workings of the elite are being revealed to the public. And all these conspiracy theories that we once believed couldn't possibly be true, including that the entire American elite are just a bunch of pedophiles. I mean, they're slowly turning out to be true. And this marks a radical turning point in American history."

Yale grad and professor Jiang Xueqin: "These Epstein... emails... illuminate... how power works... the elite [are]... all friends with each other... [and stick] together... through... secret society rituals... [so] the entire American elite are just a bunch of pedophiles." This clip of Xueqin (Jiang Xueqin), known in large part because of his Predictive History YouTube channel, is taken from an interview with Danny Haiphong (Danny Haiphong) posted to Haiphong's eponymous YouTube channel on November 14, 2025. ----------------Partial transcription of clip--------------- "So these Epstein files, these emails, they're being released, and they're really enlightening and they really illuminate for us how power works. So I will give a structural overview of what these emails reveal to us, okay? "The first thing it reveals to us is that all these people in power, the elite, they're all friends with each other. So in public, the Democrats and Republicans, they can be fighting each other, but in reality, they go to the same schools, they go to the same parties. They— they're just friends with each other. So what you're seeing in public is sort of like, political struggle in public. It's all just fake. It's like wrestling. It's reality TV. These— the elite are all friends with each other. "That's the first thing. Second thing that we've noticed about the emails is how cavalier the elite are. They think that they're above everyone else. They think they're untouchable, so they just speak their minds freely. I mean, Jeffrey Epstein, he was using Gmail in order to make all these sensitive communications. There was absolutely no operational security. He didn't really care because he believed he was untouchable. And that's how the elite think and behave. They live in a bubble. They think that they control the world, and they're untouchable, so they can do whatever they want. And all that matters is staying within this bubble, staying close to each other. "The third thing I will say is that these emails don't tell us, but we can assume that there are many layers of networking among the elite. So Jeffrey Epstein, why was he so popular among the elite? Well, I mean, first of all, he was just a friendly guy who did a lot of networking and was able to bring the elite together. But if you look at go to Epstein island, you will find that there's a temple there that's almost designed for ritual sacrifice. "So, what I've researched and what I've discovered is that the way that the elite stay together is through rituals, secret society rituals. Why? Because at the end of the day, if you're part of the elite, your biggest problem is trust. How can you trust that person to not rat you out in this political struggle? And the answer is, well, you blackmail each other, right? So, so you do acts together that we consider taboo, including, you know, s— with underage children. I mean, there are lots of transgressions that you can do. And the more transgressions you do, the more cohesive the elite is. "So, unfortunately, if you dig deeper into Jeffrey Epstein, what you'll find is a lot of transgressions, both sexual and violent as well. Bring these social taboos— I mean... what's really astonishing about the Jeffrey Epstein case is that slowly the inner workings of the elite are being revealed to the public. And all these conspiracy theories that we once believed couldn't possibly be true, including that the entire American elite are just a bunch of pedophiles. I mean, they're slowly turning out to be true. And this marks a radical turning point in American history."

Sense Receptor

151,195 views • 10 months ago

"I like 'Kiss Me Deadly' (1955) very much. I just don't think it was as important a film as some people thought it was." --- Robert Aldrich Full Excerpt: "Interviewer: We all like 'Kiss Me Deadly' (1955), but hear that you don't. Aldrich: Oh no, that's not true. I like this one very much and I'm very proud of it. If you remember when it was made was the time all the New Wave directors were editors on Cahiers. And they read into it many more things than were intended. And I think it was Truffaut who asked me at Venice the following year if I wasn't proud and happy or something about the things that Cahiers had said about it. And I am a lot older and wiser now, and I suppose I should have said "Yes" and let it go at that. But I said something to the effect that I was very glad they said it, but I couldn't really take credit for all those rather deep and significant thoughts because they weren't all intended. I am glad that they were there; maybe some of them were subconscious, but I thought a lot of them were read in. And naturally, if you had been the author of this kind of thing, you would have felt a little bit cheated, and I think they did. I think they didn't resent it, but they felt a little hurt . . . No, I like the picture very much. I just don't think it was as important a film as some people thought it was." (Robert Aldrich's interview with Ian Cameron & Mark Shivas, 1963) P.S: On this day, 71 years ago "Kiss Me Deadly" (1955) premiered in New York City, USA.

"I like 'Kiss Me Deadly' (1955) very much. I just don't think it was as important a film as some people thought it was." --- Robert Aldrich Full Excerpt: "Interviewer: We all like 'Kiss Me Deadly' (1955), but hear that you don't. Aldrich: Oh no, that's not true. I like this one very much and I'm very proud of it. If you remember when it was made was the time all the New Wave directors were editors on Cahiers. And they read into it many more things than were intended. And I think it was Truffaut who asked me at Venice the following year if I wasn't proud and happy or something about the things that Cahiers had said about it. And I am a lot older and wiser now, and I suppose I should have said "Yes" and let it go at that. But I said something to the effect that I was very glad they said it, but I couldn't really take credit for all those rather deep and significant thoughts because they weren't all intended. I am glad that they were there; maybe some of them were subconscious, but I thought a lot of them were read in. And naturally, if you had been the author of this kind of thing, you would have felt a little bit cheated, and I think they did. I think they didn't resent it, but they felt a little hurt . . . No, I like the picture very much. I just don't think it was as important a film as some people thought it was." (Robert Aldrich's interview with Ian Cameron & Mark Shivas, 1963) P.S: On this day, 71 years ago "Kiss Me Deadly" (1955) premiered in New York City, USA.

DepressedBergman

16,770 views • 5 months ago

Carrie Fisher said something in an interview that perfectly captures how creative instinct works. She was asked whether reinventing herself as a writer was a conscious decision. Her answer: "I don't think I've made many conscious decisions. I make most of my decisions in my sleep." She didn't sit down one day and declare herself a writer. It was a slow evolution, pulled forward by what she actually loved consuming. "I wrote fiction, which is what I read. And now I write screenplays, which is what I watch." That's a principle worth sitting with. She was simply doing the thing she already did for pleasure. The writing path itself began almost accidentally. After an interview in Esquire, she was approached to write a non-fiction book. That fell apart. She couldn't even remember the format she was supposed to write in. "Essays or something," she said. "See, you can't even think of the name for it. That's why I couldn't do it." So she did what made sense to her and wrote fiction instead. The screenwriting came the same way. But what most people don't know is that Fisher was doing script work decades before it became widely known. She learned punchup by necessity, not by design. On the set of Star Wars, she and Harrison Ford were handed dialogue that simply could not be spoken aloud. She described telling George Lucas: "You can type this, but you cannot say it. It'll take a couple of minutes for the nava computer to calculate the coordinates." She said it took 20 takes. Out of self-defence, she started reworking lines. Ford did the same. That habit eventually turned into a career doing punchup for major Hollywood films, helping writers fix dialogue that looked good on the page but died in the room. And then there was the work she wrote for her mother, Debbie Reynolds. Two television pilots, neither of which ever aired. Her reason for wanting to work with her mother is one of the more honest things ever said about family dynamics in Hollywood. "The main thing I want to do is work with my mom so that we don't have to have those Christmas dinners anymore. Just have a job with her and you can order her around." It didn't go the way she planned. Her grandmother showed up and bossed both of them around and, as Fisher put it, "got all the money."

Carrie Fisher said something in an interview that perfectly captures how creative instinct works. She was asked whether reinventing herself as a writer was a conscious decision. Her answer: "I don't think I've made many conscious decisions. I make most of my decisions in my sleep." She didn't sit down one day and declare herself a writer. It was a slow evolution, pulled forward by what she actually loved consuming. "I wrote fiction, which is what I read. And now I write screenplays, which is what I watch." That's a principle worth sitting with. She was simply doing the thing she already did for pleasure. The writing path itself began almost accidentally. After an interview in Esquire, she was approached to write a non-fiction book. That fell apart. She couldn't even remember the format she was supposed to write in. "Essays or something," she said. "See, you can't even think of the name for it. That's why I couldn't do it." So she did what made sense to her and wrote fiction instead. The screenwriting came the same way. But what most people don't know is that Fisher was doing script work decades before it became widely known. She learned punchup by necessity, not by design. On the set of Star Wars, she and Harrison Ford were handed dialogue that simply could not be spoken aloud. She described telling George Lucas: "You can type this, but you cannot say it. It'll take a couple of minutes for the nava computer to calculate the coordinates." She said it took 20 takes. Out of self-defence, she started reworking lines. Ford did the same. That habit eventually turned into a career doing punchup for major Hollywood films, helping writers fix dialogue that looked good on the page but died in the room. And then there was the work she wrote for her mother, Debbie Reynolds. Two television pilots, neither of which ever aired. Her reason for wanting to work with her mother is one of the more honest things ever said about family dynamics in Hollywood. "The main thing I want to do is work with my mom so that we don't have to have those Christmas dinners anymore. Just have a job with her and you can order her around." It didn't go the way she planned. Her grandmother showed up and bossed both of them around and, as Fisher put it, "got all the money."

History Nerd

42,474 views • 3 months ago