Video wird geladen...
Video konnte nicht geladen werden
Rejected piece.
65 Kommentare
That’s very sad
got a min for a new song?
Ilanti tweets esi nuv badhapadaku mammalni badhapettaku past gurthuchesi 😭
Neku kuda bad past undha bhai😮
Meerante gf unnollu bro
anni perfect ga apt iyay entraa nakii
Stay strong 🫂🫂
❤😮💨
🫂❤️
Ee Depression ki anthu anedhe ledaa bhai
Evaro ravali... But raaru
Neekem idhi first rejection kadhga anta
"Physical abuse coming from a man will never be funny to me"
Sad edit le mind lo vasthunnai unna mood ki🥲
Premalu movie lo hero ni chuste junior virat kohli la anipistadu enduku, by the way neninka aa movie choodaledu.
Chudandi, goppa movie kakapovacchu but manchi movie
U deserve better bhai
What if I lost samantha herself🥲
Enti anna morning ey start chesava
Night gurthurakudadhu ani fast ga sleep esthe kalalo vacchindi thanu, so mrng ila🥲
Propose cheyaka mundhee reject chesindi Naa baadha yevadiki cheppu kovali🫠🫠🫠
Uruko uruko
😞
It's ok 🚶♂️
Indhake lock esi unna aa pilla account DP chusa
🥲🫂
neekidhem first rejection kadu kadaa 💔
🥲🥲
🥺🥺🥺
🫂🫂
Enti bhai adhi
🫠💔
🫂🫂
Enduku bro ila edipistunnavv
Edho flow lo🥲
Lite bhai nekosam evaro okaru Devudu rasi pati untaru
Nammakam ledhu le bro, single ye inka
🥺
🥲🥲
Nene oka ammayini Reject chesa Nenem feel avvali?
Naadhi almost anthele, regret for losing her
Hero ki pink colour T shirt elaa esaarraa babu😂
Darling t shirts anthe 😁
😢😢
2 days ga idhe mood 🚶♂️🚶♂️
Poddunne duty lo join avmantava
Night gurthurakudadhu ani fast ga padukunte dreams lo adhe vacchi levadame depression tho lecham🥲
🥹
🫂🫂
🥲
Konni days baaga matladatharu Tarvatha bore kottestham, vadilestharu inka
Bro naaku ee video kavali bro
Sent
Me tweets bauntai bro
Thank you bro ❤️
😂😂
🚶♂️🚶♂️
Isokayy 🚶♂️🚶♂️
Night ey anukuna mrngs kuda vastaya neku swings
Night rakudadhu ani padukunte dreams lo occhindi, mrng lechesariki ee mood lo unna inka
😞🫂
🫂🫂
🙃
🚶♂️🚶♂️
❤️❤️❤️
![HOW THE U.N. FOOLED THE WORLD ABOUT CHINA Westerners took over control of a United Nations body to claim the Chinese locked up a million or millions of people—but they had no evidence. The “MILLIONS” number was extrapolated from interviews with just 40 people, and they were not randomly selected, said Australian lawyer and researcher Jaq James from Geolaw Narratives. These clearly untrustworthy findings were then amplified by mainstream media reports quoting people from US groups paid to demonize China—with their membership and funding hidden from readers, our own research shows. The result is a massive scam on the world’s public. Four points: . 1. THEY HIDE THE NEED FOR DERADICALIZATION Point one: In mainstream reports about terrorist deradicalization efforts after the 9/11 attack, the 9/11 act of terrorism is mentioned. Same with the deradicalization efforts after the 7/7 terrorism act in London. But there were more than 130 brutal, acts of terror in China—that’s correct, more than 130 murderous acts in which large numbers of innocent people were killed by Uyghur separatists. But these are simply not mentioned in typical reports. Only the response is mentioned. By deliberately removing the huge number of acts of terror to which the Chinese are responding, western journalists make the Chinese look like they are taking arbitrary actions against the Uyghurs. Yet the truth is that they were doing what westerners also did, responding to terrorist acts. [Image shows clip of “French re-education camps” headline] You can see how unfair that is. . 2. ORIGIN OF ‘MILLION LOCKED UP’ CLAIMS Point two: The first claim that China had arbitrarily locked up a million people was exposed by independent journalists at The Grayzone, as coming from an extrapolation from just eight people. More damning still, that extrapolation came from CHRD, a notorious US-based demonization-of-China outfit funded by the US government. The second claim that million people had been locked up came from the UNOHCR, the UN's human rights office. They took interviews from just 40 people and extrapolated what they heard to claim one million people had been unfairly locked up, as Jaq James’ research shows. Ms James points out that the UN should have interviewed randomly selected individuals to get a fair picture. But by interviewing politically networked ones, they are guaranteed to get a biased image. Again, fundamentally unfair. . 3. JUSTICE AND FAIRNESS Point three: This UN department had a leader, Michelle Bachelet, known for her appetite for justice and fairness. This meant she struggled with her staff—westerners who really controlled the operation. She insisted that their report be released alongside a response from China. Here we can see two reports – one from the UN group’s staff, and the response from China. The staff report was just 48 pages long. China’s reply was 120 pages long. How many western mainstream media outlets quoted the Chinese report, or even acknowledged its existence? Zero. Not one. Not. A. Single. One. . 4. IN WHICH WE DESTROY THE FINANCIAL TIMES Point four: The mainstream media write-ups about this subject hid the truth from readers in a shockingly deceitful way. Let’s take a look at a Financial Times article, which is fairly typical. It reinforces the UN group’s dubious findings with evidence which comes from “human rights experts and activists” – in other words, people paid by the US government to demonize China. The writers do NOT provide their names, just calling them “experts”. As Kyle Feranna said in his 2024 book: “Western NGOs, ostensibly concerned with human rights, disproportion¬ately focused on alleged violations in China despite much worse abuses occurring elsewhere in the world.” In other words, they weaponize human rights as tool to use against the Chinese. . GUANTANAMO BAY Then we get a quote from “Rushan Abbas of the Campaign for Uyghurs”. The Financial Times hides from its readers the fact that Ms Abbas was at the notorious Guantanamo Bay – not as a Muslim victim, but on the US side there. And the paper hides the fact that the Campaign for Uyghurs is financed by the NED, the CIA’s regime change spin off. These are absolutely key facts which change the whole tenor of the piece – and the FT is cheerfully deceiving its paying readers by omitting them. Abbas is quoted as saying, of the UN group’s western office staff, “without them, it would not have been released”. This reinforces many reports which say that Commissioner Michelle Bachelet did not want to release such an unfair report, but her staff, mostly westerners, pushed the unfair report out on her last day. . ANONYMOUS SOURCES Then the FT feature article quotes yet another person described as “an activist” and declines to provide his or her name. Then we go to yet another unnamed “human rights” officer. And then yes, a further unnamed “human rights” officer. And then we get a quote from an unnamed “person with knowledge”. And here we have another anonymous quote – a senior European diplomat. No name. I mean, there are so many unnamed sources in this piece, it would have been rejected at any decent journalism school. . OTHER SIDE OF THE STORY Now the FT piece breezily passes over a reference to the other side of the story by quote “China and 68 other countries”. This is hilarious. So if you are a demonizer, paid by the US State Department, you can get as many column inches in the FT as you like, with your name and funding hidden. But if you are 69 actual named countries defending China, giving the other side of the story—well, they’ll just mention it in passing. . THE REAL STORY Now, right at the bottom of the article we actually have a named person – and he actually tells the real story. “Bachelet was never really in full control of her office,” said Marc Limon. Now any journalist worth their salt would realize that that is the key quote in the whole article – and they would ask – okay, if she was not in charge of that UN group, WHO WAS? But the FT writers choose not to ask that awkward question. They don’t want to know. And they definitely don’t want their readers to know. . CLOSING LINE The FT writers close the article with a line from a quote “Uyghur journalist” who actually is named. She is Nuriman Abdureshid. So the reader is left thinking – oh, so they actually did manage to discuss this with someone in Xinjiang, someone with a name and a job. But what the FT "journalists" omit to tell the paper's long-suffering readers is that Ms Nuriman Abdureshid is associated with a group called Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation, a Washington DC group which demonizes China to such an extreme extent that even other anti-China groups avoid them out of sheer embarrassment. Do I have proof that Victims of Communism is backed by the government? Well, the AI which has taken over Google tells us that Victims of Communism has received funding from the US State Department to deal with human rights issues. Here’s what happens when we look up their funding to check the details. [CLICKS LINK] “SORRY YOU HAVE BEEN BLOCKED’. Ah yes, the famous US “free speech”. . A QUESTION I’m going to close with a question. Why is the political and media class in the west working so hard to fool the world about the Chinese? Why work so hard to demonize a country that is working hard to lift itself out of starvation level poverty? What don’t they want the world to know? Could it be that China is actually doing something right? Think about that – and we may all, one day, be on the road to peace. .](https://image.24vids.com/tw-2070014240581431742/amplify_video_thumb/2070012930083758080/img/U1NzaDJxmLJBcpd4.jpg)