Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

Go Home

Remembering a legendary writer whose powerful words and unwavering commitment to social justice left an indelible mark on Marathi literature and society, Lokshahir Annabhau Sathe, on his Birth Anniversary! शोषित-पीडित-वंचितांच्या हक्कांसाठी लढणारे लोकनायक, साहित्यसम्राट 'लोकशाहीर अण्णाभाऊ साठे' यांना जयंतीदिनी विनम्र अभिवादन! #लोकशाहीर_अण्णाभाऊ_साठे #अण्णाभाऊ_साठे #AnnaBhauSathe #Maharashtra

20,834 views • 2 days ago •via X (Twitter)

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

Honouring the Enduring Legacy of Sahityaratna Lokshahir AnnaBhau Sathe Glad to be present at the bhoomipujan and stone plaque unveiling of the 'Sahityaratna Lokshahir Anna Bhau Sathe Research and Training Institute' being developed by the Slum Rehabilitation Authority, Brihanmumbai, along with DCM Eknath Shinde ji. The construction of a grand memorial for Sahityaratna Lokshahir Annabhau Sathe gained momentum in 2024. The project was entrusted to the Slum Rehabilitation Authority (SRA), with a commitment to ensuring the proper rehabilitation of every resident. We are determined to complete the memorial by 2029 and it will be inaugurated by Hon PM Narendra Modi Ji. Lokshahir Anna Bhau Sathe made extraordinary contributions to India's freedom struggle, the Goa Liberation Movement and the Sanyukta Maharashtra Movement. Through his literature, he gave voice to the marginalised and working class, inspiring generations with his courage, conviction and commitment to social justice. His literary legacy transcended borders, earning global recognition, including the installation of his statue in Russia. The Research and Training Institute being established as part of this memorial will empower the youth of the community and help them become active participants in Maharashtra's development journey. The work on the grand memorial of Adya Krantiguru Krantiveer Lahuji Vastad Salve in Pune is progressing steadily, with nearly 65% of the project already completed and we remain committed to completing it at the earliest. Union MoS Dr. Ramdas Athawale ji, Legislative Council Deputy Chairman Sachin Ahir, Minister Mangal Prabhat Lodha ji, Minister Adv. Ashish Shelar, Minister Sanjay Shirsat, MP Sanjay Patil, BJP Mumbai President MLA Ameet Satam, Mumbai Mayor Ritutai Tawde and other dignitaries were present. Narendra Modi Eknath Shinde - एकनाथ शिंदे Ramdas Athawale Sachin Ahir Mangal Prabhat Lodha Adv. Ashish Shelar - ॲड. आशिष शेलार Sanjay Shirsat Sanjay Dina Patil Ameet Satam Ritu Tawde Slum Rehabilitation Authority, Brihanmumbai #Maharashtra #Mumbai #LokshahirAnnabhauSathe

Devendra Fadnavis

18,536 views • 3 days ago

Honouring a Literary Legend, Strengthening Maharashtra's Cultural Legacy Glad to inaugurate the renovated Lokshahir Anna Bhau Sathe Natyagruha along with DCM Eknath Shinde ji in Mumbai, today. The renovated theatre, equipped with modern infrastructure and advanced facilities, will provide a vibrant platform for theatre artists to showcase their talent while offering audiences a richer cultural experience. It is a matter of immense pride that this theatre bears the name of Sahityaratna Lokshahir Annabhau Sathe, one of Maharashtra's greatest literary icons whose legacy continues to inspire generations. His writings reflected the realities of society, gave voice to the aspirations and struggles of the working class and became a powerful force in the India's freedom struggle and the Samyukta Maharashtra Movement. An eminent writer, he enriched Marathi literature through novels, short stories, poetry, plays and folk art, with his works translated into many languages across the world, taking his timeless message far beyond India's borders. Legislative Council Deputy Chairman Sachin Ahir, Minister Mangal Prabhat Lodha ji, MLC Prasad Lad, MLA Kalidas Kolambkar ji, MLA Ameet Satam, MLA Prakash Surve, Mumbai Mayor Ritutai Tawde, Standing Committee Chairman Prabhakar Shinde and other dignitaries were present. Eknath Shinde - एकनाथ शिंदे Sachin Ahir Mangal Prabhat Lodha Prasad Lad MLA Kalidas Kolambkar Ameet Satam Prakash Surve - प्रकाश सुर्वे Ritu Tawde Prabhakar Shinde - प्रभाकर शिंदे (Modi Ka Parivar) #Maharashtra #Mumbai #LokshahirAnnabhauSathe

Devendra Fadnavis

16,052 views • 3 days ago

Punyashlok Rajmata Ahilyadevi Holkar: A Timeless Legacy of Wisdom, Justice, and Empowerment ! It was truly a blessed experience to celebrate the 300th Birth Anniversary of Punyashlok Rajmata Ahilyadevi Holkar in ShriKshetra Chaundi, Ahilyanagar— a visionary queen whose timeless legacy reflects profound wisdom and unwavering devotion to her people. I felt deeply honoured to address this historic gathering. Although Hon President, Smt. Droupadi Murmu Ji and Hon PM Narendra Modi Ji could not join us today due to unavoidable circumstances, they will soon visit this sacred land, the birthplace of Punyashlok Rajmata Ahilyadevi Holkar, to seek her blessings. Punyashlok Rajmata Ahilyadevi Holkar is remembered for her governance and public service even after 300 years. During a challenging period when India's cultural identity was under threat from foreign invasions, Punyashlok Rajmata Ahilyadevi Holkar protected and restored many important sacred sites, including the famous Ghats of Kashi and the Somnath Temple, using her own wealth. Her visionary leadership was marked by justice, compassion, and an unwavering commitment to social responsibility. Beyond her remarkable work in temple restoration and infrastructure, she actively empowered our society. From promoting Maheshwari textiles to forming women’s military units and banning dowry, her rule was a great example of strength, fairness, and social progress. Today, as we celebrate her 300th birth anniversary at her birthplace, ShriKshetra Chaundi, we proudly continue her inspiring legacy. Our government is proudly commemorating her contributions through meetings here in Chaundi, initiating dedicated women's development schemes named after her, and ensuring the protection and restoration of our sacred Jyotirlinga temples. A dedicated fund of ₹681 crore has been allocated for local development projects, and a film will soon be produced to introduce her extraordinary life and achievements to new generations. Punyashlok Rajmata Ahilyadevi Holkar’s life and wisdom continue to guide us towards building a fair, empowered, and culturally proud India. She did not simply inherit power—she earned it through her dedication and great leadership. Her legacy is not just remembered; it continues to live on, guiding us towards a brighter future. Legislative Council Chairman Prof. Ram Shinde ji, DCM Eknath Shinde ji, Minister Radhakrishna Vikhe Patil ji, Minister Atul Save, Minister Dattatray Bharane and other dignitaries were present. Eknath Shinde - एकनाथ शिंदे Ram Shinde आ प्रा राम शिंदे Radhakrishna Vikhe Patil Atul Save Dattatray Bharane #Maharashtra #Ahilyanagar #AhilyaBaiHolkarAt300

Devendra Fadnavis

17,233 views • 1 year ago

On the birth anniversary of Shri Subhash Chandra Bose, we remember Bharat's revolutionary leader whose life was an unbroken vow to freedom, dignity, and self-respect. Revered across borders and equally loved among the patriotic masses of the Republic of Balochistan, Netaji stands as a symbol of courage that transcends geography and time. Subhash Chandra Bose embodied uncompromising resistance to colonial domination. When dialogue and petitions failed, he had the moral clarity and daring to choose a path few could imagine, uniting the Indian diaspora across continents and organizing the Azad Hind Fauj, convinced that an empire built on force would only yield to force. His leadership awakened a sense of collective destiny, transforming scattered hope into disciplined resolve. For millions, Netaji proved that freedom is not gifted; it is claimed through sacrifice, unity, and fearless action. What makes Netaji eternally fascinating is not only his defiance, but his brilliance. An often-forgotten fact: he resigned from the prestigious Indian Civil Service, a position many would consider the pinnacle of success under the Raj, because he refused to serve an unjust system. Later, as the head of the Provisional Government of Free India in 1943, he established symbols of sovereignty currency, stamps, and even a civil code asserting that freedom must be lived, not merely dreamed. He also championed gender equality in action by forming the Rani of Jhansi Regiment, one of the world’s first all-women combat units, decades ahead of its time. On this day, we remember Netaji not just as a leader of armed resistance, but as a visionary who believed in discipline, secular unity, and social justice. His call “Give me blood, and I will give you freedom” was not a thirst for violence, but a demand for total commitment to liberty. Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose lives on wherever people refuse to kneel before oppression. His legacy continues to inspire all freedom-loving nations and peoples, reminding us that courage, when guided by purpose, can change the course of history. The sixty million people of the Republic of Balochistan are lucky that we have our national unified leader Hyrbyair Marri who is the Subhash Chandra of Balochistan who never compromised on Balochistan's boundaries, identity, language, and right to liberation. Jai Hind. Jai Balochistan

Mir Yar Baloch

17,603 views • 6 months ago

Today, on the 10th death anniversary of our dear brother Rohith Vemula, my heart aches with deep sorrow and unquenchable anger. At Hyderabad Central University, the brave comrades of the Ambedkar Students Association gathered to honor Rohith, Payal Tadvi, Darshan Solanki, and every Dalit-Bahujan student whose lives were stolen by the vicious grip of caste discrimination on our campuses. These weren’t mere suicides — they were cold-blooded institutional murders, deliberate acts of exclusion, humiliation, and cruelty that pushed brilliant young minds to despair. Rohith’s final words — “My birth is my fatal accident” — still pierce through the silence, exposing how caste hatred thrives even in the so-called temples of knowledge and progress. I bow in reverence to Radhika Amma’s unbreakable spirit, to the relentless fighters of ASA, and to every voice that refuses to let these names be forgotten. Your pain is our pain; your fight is our fight. As a proud voice from the Congress fold, I reaffirm our commitment: under the Congress governments in Telangana and Karnataka, the Rohith Vemula Act will be enacted in the coming months — a powerful law to criminalize caste-based discrimination, protect marginalized students, punish perpetrators, and ensure no Dalit, Adivasi, or Bahujan student ever feels disposable again. This is not just a promise; it is our sacred duty to annihilate caste from education and society. Rohith, Payal, Darshan — you are alive in every act of resistance, in every demand for justice, in the fire we carry forward. You live through us. Your sacrifice fuels our rage into unbreakable resolve for equality. Jai Bhim! ✊🏾 #JusticeForRohithVemula #RohithShahadatDin #AnnihilateCaste #RohithVemulaAct Congress Telangana Congress Karnataka Congress Rahul Gandhi Revanth Reddy Bhatti Vikramarka Mallu Siddaramaiah DK Shivakumar

Jignesh Mevani

13,535 views • 6 months ago

A Father’s Love ❤️ I spoke to you just last week on your birthday, October 1st, not realizing it would be our last conversation. I’m still finding the words, but I want to try to do justice to your legacy. You led me to Christ when I was 16 at Rhema Bible Church, guiding me through every part of my Christian journey. You were always there to pray for me, to listen, to teach, to guide. In you, I found a spiritual father, a constant source of strength and inspiration. I remember sharing with you about meeting the man I love and, soon after, you married Romeo and me in December 2000. You were there through my struggles, always reminding me to wait on the Lord. When my parents passed, you were by my side. You christened my children and were there for every significant moment. For 34 years, I’ve watched you live out your faith with courage and conviction, standing up for justice and unity even when it made you unpopular. You brought together people of all backgrounds, always teaching, always leading with love. Today, we celebrate a life truly well-lived. You had a gift for making everyone feel seen. You nurtured us, pastored us, and raised up countless people who rose to their calling. You were never judgmental, embracing our imperfections with compassion. Witnessing you pass the baton to Pastor Joshua was a testament to your servant heart, showing us how a true leader serves even in their final days. Your legacy of love, compassion, and unwavering purpose has left an indelible mark. You pioneered ministry, reaching across South Africa and beyond. When we heard you were unwell, we held onto hope, knowing the strength of your spirit. I’ll miss your humor, your grace, and your powerful sermons. We are grateful for the lessons you’ve imparted and the love you shared. 2 Timothy 4:7 — You fought the good fight, you finished the race, you kept the faith. Goodnight, Mfundisi. We’ll carry your legacy forward, until we meet again. 🙏🏽✨ #PastorRayMcCauley #Legacy #Faith

Basetsana Kumalo

44,985 views • 1 year ago

PRESS STATEMENT ON THE GRUESOME EXTRAJUDICIAL KILLING OF MR. MICHAEL KENECHUKWU EKEMEZIE BY SWISS POLICE OFFICERS IN LAUSANNE, SWITZERLAND, ON MAY 25TH, 2025 It is with profound heartbreak and heavy sense of outrage that we speak on the tragic killing of Mr. Michael Kenechukwu Ekemezie, a Nigerian citizen and an indigene of Anambra State, who was fatally assaulted by officers of the Swiss police in Lausanne, Switzerland, on the 25th May, 2025. Mr. Ekemezie, had lived in Switzerland for over a decade working hard like many others in pursuit of a better life. But on that day, his life was cut short in a brutal encounter with law enforcement —an encounter that bears chilling similarities to the infamous murder of George Floyd in the United States, exactly five years earlier. We remember how the world watched in horror on May 25th , 2020 when George Floyd, a 46-year-old Black man, was murdered in cold blood- a White police officer knelt on his neck for over nine minutes while Floyd was handcuffed and lying face-down on a street in Minneapolis. His final words/dying cries, his helplessness, and the silence of those around him, sparked global reckoning with racial injustice and police brutality. Sadly, history has repeated itself on May 25, 2025. The footage emerging from Lausanne shows Michael, too, handcuffed and pinned face-down, by an officer who used brutal force that proved fatal. His distress was visible. His life could have been saved. But he was left there- ignored, unheard, ultimately lifeless . No attempt was made to help him. He was subjected to lethal force that ultimately led to his death. What is equally painful is not only the brutal manner of Mr. Ekemezie’s death but the deafening silence that has followed it. Unlike the global response that followed George Floyd’s death, the murder of Mr. Ekemezie has received little to no coverage from major international media outlets such as CNN, BBC, or Al Jazeera. Within Nigeria, mainstream media has also largely remained silent. This silence is both unacceptable and deeply troubling, especially as it suggests a deliberate effort to downplay or conceal the brutal nature of the killing. It further suggests that Michael’s life, like those of many Africans, can be taken without consequence or even acknowledgement. In the face of this, Nigerians and other Africans residing in Switzerland have taken to the streets in protest, demanding accountability, transparency, and justice. Yet the response from the Swiss authorities has been lukewarm at best. Swiss authorities' response thus far, has failed to meet the minimum threshold of transparency and urgency required in such egregious cases of state-sanctioned violence. Upon being officially briefed by Mr. Ekemezie’s devastated family, our legal team immediately began the process of seeking justice through diplomatic and legal channel aimed at invoking all available international legal and diplomatic mechanisms. We have since submitted a detailed and strongly-worded petition to the Swiss Embassy in Nigeria, demanding the immediate identification, arrest, and prosecution of the officers involved in this heinous act. Among other things, our petition calls for: 1. A full, independent, and transparent investigation into the incident; 2.Public disclosure of the identities and roles of all officers involved; 3.Immediate suspension and arrest of the officers pending investigation; official apology and appropriate compensation for Michael’s family; 5.Concrete reforms to prevent such abuse in the future. We have also formally petitioned the Nigerians in Diaspora Commission (NIDCOM) and other relevant government bodies, demanding prompt diplomatic engagement with the Swiss Government. The life of every Nigerian citizen, whether at home or abroad, must be treated with dignity and protected with resolve. This is not merely about one man’s death—it is about justice, dignity, and the sanctity of human life. It is about sending a clear message that Nigerian lives cannot be wasted with impunity, and that the international community must not turn a blind eye when Africans are killed unjustly. We call on: •The Government of Switzerland to rise to its international obligations and ensure justice is done; •The Nigerian Government to assertively demand answers and justice for its citizen; •International human rights organizations, civil society groups, and media platforms to speak out and shine a light on this gross injustice. As we mourn the painful loss of Mr. Michael Kenechukwu Ekemezie, we reiterate our unwavering commitment to pursuing justice through all lawful and diplomatic means, for him, for his family, and for all those whose lives have been marked by violence and silence. Justice must not only be done, but must also be seen to be done. Signed: Sir Ifeanyi Ejiofor, Esq. ( KSC) May 30th, 2025. The White House USAGov Department of State President Donald J. Trump Donald J. Trump United Nations Int'l Criminal Court UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer Elon Musk NHRC Nigeria Amnesty International Nigeria Amnesty International Swiss Federal Government Swiss MFA Karin Keller-Sutter Government of Nigeria Nigerians in Diaspora Commission Office of the national security adviser Bola Ahmed Tinubu

bar ifeanyi ejiofor

282,772 views • 1 year ago

Diana Carney, wife of Canada’s unelected de-facto Prime Minister Mark Carney Mark Carney presents herself as an economist and environmental advocate, but a closer look reveals a web of corruption and shady behavior that taints her public image. Born into a wealthy British pig farming family, educated at Oxford and the University of Pennsylvania, and married to a powerful banker-turned-politician since 1994, her elite status contrasts sharply with the questionable company she keeps and the ethically dubious situations she’s entangled in. As a Senior Advisor at the Eurasia Group 2021, she’s surrounded by figures whose pasts scream corruption, and her own actions suggest a woman comfortable in the shadows of privilege and power, far from the principled eco-warrior she claims to be. Her professional circle at the Eurasia Group is a cesspool of compromised individuals, starting with Evan Solomon, a colleague who was fired from CBC in 2015 after the Toronto Star exposed him for secretly brokering art sales and pocketing $300,000 in commissions, a blatant conflict of interest that shattered his credibility. Then there’s Gerald Butts Gerald Butts the Vice Chairman, who resigned as Justin Trudeau’s Principal Secretary in 2019 amid the SNC-Lavalin scandal, accused of pressuring the Attorney General to intervene in a criminal case against SNC-Lavalin, an act that violated the Conflict of Interest Act and reeked of political interference. These are not casual acquaintances but key players in her professional world, suggesting she’s either oblivious to their stench or complicit in their orbit of ethical rot. The Eurasia Group itself, where she holds a prominent role, has gorged on over $1.5 million in Canadian government contracts between 2017 and 2025, including a $446,210 deal in February 2025 from Natural Resources Canada for “geopolitical research.” With her husband now leading the nation, this smells like a textbook conflict of interest, a cozy arrangement where public funds flow to an organization tied to the Prime Minister’s spouse, all while she plays the part of a climate policy expert. Beyond her professional ties, Diana Carney’s social connections are equally damning. In 2013, she and Mark were photographed hobnobbing with Ghislaine Maxwell at the Wilderness Festival in Oxfordshire, hosted at the estate of Carney’s sister-in-law, Lady Tania Rotherwick, a close friend of Maxwell’s. Maxwell, later convicted of child sex trafficking and tied to Jeffrey Epstein, was already linked to Epstein’s crimes by then, his 2008-2009 prison stint for sexual offenses a public stain. Posing with Maxwell, even before her conviction, shows a reckless disregard for the company she keeps, a snapshot of privilege mingling with depravity that undermines any moral high ground she might claim. This isn’t a one-off; it’s a glimpse into a world where the Carneys brushed shoulders with the darkest elements of high society, unperturbed by the implications. Her public behavior only deepens the portrait of a corrupt, classless figure. In 2013, she tweeted about struggling to find housing in London, whining, “Maybe I’ll be able to find a place to live in London after all,” despite a £250,000 annual housing allowance, roughly $7,700 a week. This came as Britain grappled with economic hardship and soaring unemployment, earning her scathing rebuke from Labour MP John Mann and widespread public outrage for her tone-deaf entitlement. It’s not just a slip; it’s a window into a woman so steeped in wealth that she can’t fathom how her words land, a stark contrast to the eco-conscious image she peddles. Her environmental advocacy, running “Eco Products that Work” and railing against tea bags and bottled water, feels like a hollow performance when you consider her privileged perch, a rich woman lecturing the masses while her husband’s career and her own affiliations rake in millions. The Eurasia Group’s government contracts are the rotten cherry on top.

Vote Canada

303,070 views • 1 year ago

BDS is what would have made the difference, turning an empty gesture - the recognition of Palestine - into an ethical, useful, game changer. Hello, I am Yanis Varoufakis here to discuss the (hugely) belated recognition of the State of Palestine by a number of Western governments – Britain’s, France’s, Canada’s and Australia’s. If only they had done this many decades ago, maybe Israel’s ethnic cleansing of a people whose existence Israel did not recognise, on a land that Israel was keen to expropriate from these unrecognised people, maybe that ethnic cleansing project would have been halted - maybe it would not have morphed into the genocide that is unfolding with untold cruelty as we speak. Is it not a good thing that the governments of Britain, France, Canada and Australia were forced by public opinion, by sensational losses in voter support, to recognise the State of Palestine. I suppose it is a good thing. But, friends, make no mistake. I am very much afraid that Keir Starmer, Emanuel Macron, Mark Carney and Anthony Albanese did not recognise Palestine so as to ensure that it comes into existence as a real, a sovereign state for a people Israel has put on death row but only so that they do not actually do what they can to end the genocide and to make the Palestinian state a possibility. In a nutshell, these Western governments, after decades of complicity, are suddenly falling over themselves to perform a performative act in a manner that does nothing to bring about that which they proclaim: a functioning Palestinian State. So: Let us not applaud them. Let us not be fooled by them. Theirs is not an ethical awakening. It is merely the calculated management of a genocide they are doing nothing to stop. It is hypocrisy polished to a fine sheen, designed not to end the suffering in Gaza, but to sanitise their role in perpetuating it. On the one hand, we observe the grand theatre of great power diplomacy. The press conferences, the solemn declarations, the recognition of a state that exists on paper. Meanwhile, on the ground, the very foundation of such a state – its people and its institutions – are being systematically erased. These governments—the Starmer, the Macron, the Albanese, the Carney administrations—they want you to be distracted by their "brave" and "principled" stand while they remain complicit in the war crimes, in the ethnic cleansing, in the genocide. And why now? Why, after the tens of thousands dead, after the schools and hospitals turned to rubble, after thousands of wounded children were forced to survive alone, without their families who now lie buried under blocks of cement? Because global outrage has reached a boiling point that can no longer be contained by their usual pro-Israeli propaganda. Their recognition of Palestine is a pressure valve, designed precisely to defuse that outrage, to save Israel’s legitimacy, safe in the knowledge that Israel will continue, with their tacit support, to block each and every move toward a viable Palestinian state. They are recognising a Palestinian state while tacitly conniving with Israel's leaders to ensure it never comes into being. How? By actively refusing to take the one set of actions that has a proven historical record of ending oppression and Apartheid: Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions on the perpetrator. Thankfully that’s not all. Mercifully, something else is going on. While Western leaders perform their diplomatic pantomime, hundreds of people are sailing right now in the Mediterranean Sea. The Global Sumud Flotilla. A flotilla of teachers, journalists, activists, dreamers, parliamentarians, carrying with them the global majority’s commitment that Israel’s Siege on Gaza, that the planned and meticulously implemented genocide of Palestinians will be terminated – that it will not continue in our name – that the impending acts of piracy by the Israeli state will be exposed for what they are: misanthropic violations of minimum ethical standards, of International Law. Israeli propaganda, echoed by its apologists, claims these brave souls are "choosing to enter a war zone, to violate prohibited security zones." This is a shameless lie. The flotilla's ships are not entering a war zone. They are heading towards a site of genocide on a land that Israel is illegally occupying—a fact confirmed by the International Court of Justice, which in June 2024 ordered Israel to vacate it. So, I ask you: if Starmer, Macron, Carney and Albanese really wanted to end the genocide, what would they do? They would not be issuing statements. They would be sending a naval vessel to protect the flotilla! They would be enforcing international law. But they will not. Because their recognition is an empty gesture, and actual solidarity requires a break with organised misanthropy and with the arms dealers who fund them and their political campaigns. This duality, this chasm between Western governments’ words and deeds, is the essence of their hypocrisy. They grant a piece of paper called ‘statehood’ with one hand, while with the other they continue to arm, fund, and diplomatically shield the very power that ensures this statehood remains a cruel fiction. They remind me of a monument I once saw in Canberra, Australia’s capital. Walking from the High Court to the National Library, you stumble in a unique monument — a monument celebrating a High Court of Australia judgment. On it are inscribed the magnificent words of Sir Gerard Brennan from the Mabo case: “The common law of this country will perpetuate injustice if it were to continue to persist in characterising the indigenous inhabitants of Australian colonies as people too low in the scale of social organisation to be acknowledged as possessing rights and interests in land.” A magnificent sentiment. A legal revolution. But what followed? Words on a monument. The recognition of native title was granted, but the power structures, the economic dispossession, the systemic inequality—they were largely left intact. The recognition became a shield *against* more substantive justice. This is the playbook of imperialist white settlers. Recognise a right in theory to avoid implementing it in practice. This is what is on offer today for Palestine. A state recognised on an imaginary map in a European capital, while on the ground, the apartheid reality is reinforced with every bomb, every bullet, every checkpoint. The key, the only key that unlocks the door to freedom, is not recognition. It is BDS: boycott, divest and sanction. And its goal? Its goal must be to bring about equal political rights from the Jordan to the Mediterranean. Recognition would have mattered at Oslo. It was the leverage that was squandered. Now, in the absence of any peace process, it is merely symbolic. And in its current form, it is worse than symbolic—it is a pacifier. We must understand the fundamental truth, so elegantly captured by that Mabo judgment but so tragically ignored in its aftermath: “Violent instability is baked into any system where one side has power and rights and the other has none.” You cannot have peace, you cannot have security, for anyone—Israeli or Palestinian—under a system of apartheid. The violence of the occupier begets resistance; the violence of the oppressed is then used to justify further, overwhelming state violence. It is a vicious cycle engineered by the powerful. So, when these Western leaders herald their recognition as a progressive move, ask them one question: Where are the sanctions? Where is the arms embargo? Where are the trade restrictions? Where is the protection for the flotillas? Until they answer you convincingly, their words are not just hollow. They are weapons. They are the grease for the machinery of genocide. They are the modern-day equivalent of the colonial administrator who acknowledges the humanity of the native in a London speech, while signing the order to clear their land. Let us not let them get away with it. See their recognition for what it is: a desperate attempt to save a crumbling system of oppression, not to end it. Our duty is clear. To amplify the call for BDS. To stand with the flotillas. To demand not words on paper, but justice on the ground. The Palestinian people do not need their hypocritical recognition. They need their freedom. And freedom only comes when the cost of oppression becomes too high for the oppressor to bear.

Yanis Varoufakis

106,850 views • 10 months ago

Joe Rogan stunned by who really ended America's 'woke period': Elon Musk | Chris Melore, Daily Mail Joe Rogan was left in awe after the CEO of a billionaire-dollar tech company revealed who he thinks has ended America's 'woke' culture. Amjad Masad, the co-founder of Replit, a cloud-based coding platform, confidently declared that Elon Musk erased an alleged oppressive ideology that took over society, particularly within the tech industry. During the latest episode of the Joe Rogan Experience on July 2, Masad claimed that many companies recently went through a 'woke period where you couldn't talk about certain things,' like the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians. 'Has that gone away?' Rogan asked, leading Masad to smile and reply, 'Yeah, yeah, totally gone away.' When Rogan followed up by asking what changed the culture so quickly, Masad simply said 'Elon.' The Replit CEO then added that Musk's purchase of Twitter (now called X) completely removed the stigma of voicing opposing viewpoints in public and online. 'Buying Twitter is the single most impactful thing for free speech. Especially on these issues of being able to talk freely about a lot of subjects that are more sensitive,' Masad explained. Masad, a Jordanian-American whose family is from Palestine, noted that he had faced fierce criticism from colleagues for talking publicly about the situation in Gaza. Despite calling himself a 'moderate Palestinian,' Masad said he has been called anti-Semitic for supporting a two-state solution, which includes protections for Israelis, in the region. While speaking about the humanitarian crisis in Gaza, Rogan claimed that society was devolving into groups of people being convinced by their leaders that another group of people were their enemies. 'It's f****** insane. And the fact that it's still going on in 2025, with all we know about corruption and the theft of resources and power and influence, it's crazy that this is still happening,' Rogan said during the podcast. Masad then said he hoped the internet was starting to reach its potential as a platform for opening minds and removing the 'veil of propaganda and ignorance.' 'It was starting to happen in like 2010, 2011. And then you saw YouTube start to close down. You saw Facebook start to close down, Twitter. And suddenly, we had like this period of darkness,' the tech entrepreneur said. Although Rogan said that this censorship initially had good intentions of trying to weed out hate speech, it quickly went too far when tech companies began silencing 'malinformation.' Malinformation is a term used to describe truthful information that is still censored because social media companies and governments claim these facts are harmful to the overall public good. 'That's crazy. You're turning adults into infants, and you're turning the state into God. This is the secular religion. This is the religion of people that are atheists,' Rogan warned. 'The west was never about that. The west was about individual liberty,' Masad replied. The two men then shifted back to Musk's takeover of X, with Rogan arguing that the changes the CEO instituted 'opened up discussion.' While Rogan said that the changes meant to promote more freedom , such as reduced content moderation and restoring suspended accounts, allowed more hate speech to sneak back into X, he argued that more people are now able to tell the difference between news and propaganda. 'You have a lot of people that are recognizing actual true facts that are very inconvenient to the narrative that's displayed on mainstream media,' Rogan said. After Musk purchased Twitter in 2022, he noted that his goal was to 'maximize free speech.' Musk has also repeatedly called out what he referred to as the 'woke mind virus' that was threatening society. During an appearance on the Joe Rogan Experience in November, Musk blamed woke culture for attempting to censor humor and satire, with polarizing topics like social justice essentially becoming off-limits to criticism. 'The woke ideology makes humor illegal. There are so many humor no-fly zones. You can't make fun of anything,' Musk told Rogan in 2024. 'At its heart, wokeness is divisive, exclusionary, and hateful. It basically gives mean people a shield to be mean and cruel, armored in false virtue,' Musk added during a 2021 interview with satire website the Babylon Bee. In the wake of Musk's acquisition of X, other major tech and social media platforms have caved to mounting pressure to roll back censorship online. In March, lawmakers in Washington subpoenaed officials at Google, demanding they turn over company records tied to the censorship of Americans during the Biden presidency. Republicans have long accused the Biden Administration of pressuring major companies into censoring free speech during and after the coronavirus pandemic, which Rogan and Masan also criticized during the July 2 podcast. Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg also publicly confessed that both Meta and Facebook censored conservative opinions on an 'industrial scale' during this time. Read more:

Owen Gregorian

90,828 views • 1 year ago

Like seemingly everyone on this app I have plenty of opinions about Twitter > X and figure now is a good time to open up a bit about my experience at the company. I tweeted for years into the void for the love of it like many of you, but after selling my startup to Twitter in 2020 I finally got to see it from the inside. Up close it was both amazing and terrible, like so many other companies and things in life. As someone with a maniacal sense of urgency built into me, Twitter often felt siloed and bureaucratic. Dumb power plays, reorgs and team name changes for the sake of someone’s ego were distractions that occurred too regularly. You couldn’t just be a builder — you also needed to be a politician. I was shocked by how old and bespoke the infrastructure was, but there was little will to think beyond quarterly earnings calls because we were all beholden to the masters of mDAU and revenue growth as a public company. It often felt like things were held together with duct tape and glue, and that many people had just accepted that a small product change could take months or quarters to build. Management had become bloated to accommodate career growth and the company culture felt too soft and entitled for my own taste. Healthy debate and criticism was replaced by a default refrain of “no, that can’t be done” or “another team owns that so don’t touch it”. Teams could spend months building a feature and then some last-minute kerfuffle meant it’d get killed for being too risky. Just talking directly to customers could turn into a turf war and create deadlocks between functions. I recall one such episode where a teammate spent a month trying to get clearance to reach out to some creators. He went through 3 layers of management and 6 different functional teams. In the end 4 executives were involved in the approval. It was insanity, and unfortunately I saw several top performers get burnt out and demoralized after exhausting experiences like that. Most people were good at their jobs but it was nearly impossible to fire poor performers — instead they got shuffled around to other teams because few managers had the will or resources to figure out how to get them out. A high performance culture pulls everyone up, but the opposite weighs everyone down. Twitter often felt like a place that kept squandering its own potential, which was sad and frustrating to see. The person who was best at cutting through the BS and inspiring a vision during my tenure was Kayvon Beykpour, but he wasn’t fully empowered to run the company since he wasn’t the CEO. Despite those real issues, I was lucky enough to work with some of the most talented people in the business at Twitter in product, design, engineering, research, legal, BD, trust & safety, marketing, PR and more. Often it was a small cross-functional team of intrinsically motivated people who made the biggest impact by challenging some core assumption. Those teams were very fun to be on but they felt like the exception rather than the rule. The months of waiting for the deal to close in 2022 were particularly slow and painful; it felt like leadership hid behind lawyers and legal language as all answers about the company’s future notoriously included the phrase “fiduciary duty”. Colleagues openly talked about how Twitter was being sold because leadership didn’t have conviction in their own plan or ability to fix longstanding problems. Although I didn’t know much about Elon I was cautiously optimistic – I saw him as the guy who built incredible and enduring companies like Tesla and SpaceX, so perhaps his private ownership could shake things up and breathe new life into the company. My take on what’s happened since then is full of lived nuance. When people ask why I stayed it’s easy to answer: optimism, curiosity, personal growth and money. From the beginning I saw that some changes Elon was going to make were smart and others were stupid, but when I’m on a team I uphold the philosophy of “praise in public and criticize in private”. I was far from a silent wallflower. I shared my opinions openly and pushed back often, both before and after the acquisition. I made peace with the fact that I didn’t have psychological safety at Twitter 2.0 and that meant I could be fired at any moment, and for no reason at all. I watched it happen repeatedly and saw how negatively it impacted team morale. Although I couldn’t change the situation I did my best to shine a light on folks who were doing important work while being an emotionally supportive leader for those who were struggling to adapt to the more brutalist and hardcore culture. In person Elon is oddly charming and he’s genuinely funny. He also has personality quirks like telling the same stories and jokes over and over. The challenge is his personality and demeanor can turn on a dime going from excited to angry. Since it was hard to read what mood he might be in and what his reaction would be to any given thing, people quickly became afraid of being called into meetings or having to share negative news with him. At times it felt like the inner circle was too zealous and fanatical in their unwavering support of everything he said. When individuals encouraged me to be careful about what I said I politely thanked them and said I would not be taking their advice. I had no interest in adding to a culture of fear or walking on eggshells around Elon. Either he would respect me for being real or he could fire me. Either outcome was okay. I quickly learned that product and business decisions were nearly always the result of him following his gut instinct, and he didn’t seem compelled to seek out or rely on a lot of data or expertise to inform it. That was particularly frustrating for me since I believed I had useful institutional knowledge that could help him make better decisions. Instead he'd poll Twitter, ask a friend, or even ask his biographer for product advice. At times it seemed he trusted random feedback more than the people in the room who spent their lives dedicated to tackling the problem at hand. I never figured out why and remain puzzled by it. I don’t think things had to be as difficult or dramatic as they turned out to be but I can’t say I’d bet against Elon or count him out. He’s smart and has enough money to make a lot of mistakes and then course correct when things go awry. As the largest shareholder he can tank the value in the short-term, but eventually he’ll need things to turn around. His focus on speed is incredible and he’s obviously not afraid of blowing things up, but now the real measure will be how it get reconstructed and if enough people want the new everything app he is building. I learned a ton from watching Elon up close – the good, the bad and the ugly. His boldness, passion and storytelling is inspiring, but his lack of process and empathy is painful. Elon has an exceptional talent for tackling hard physics-based problems but products that facilitate human connection and communication require a different type of social-emotional intelligence. Social networks are hard to kill but they’re not immune from death spirals. Only time will tell what the outcome will be but I hope X finds its footing because competition is good for consumers. In the meantime, I have a lot of empathy for the employees who are working tirelessly behind the scenes, the advertisers who want a stable platform to sell their stuff on, and the customers who are experiencing chaotic updates. It’s been a madhouse. Twitter moved at the speed of molasses and suffered from bureaucracy but now X is run by a mercurial leader whose instinct is driven by the unique and undoubtedly weird experience of being the biggest voice on the platform. Many of you know me from the sleeping bag incident where I slept on a conference room floor, so I figure, let’s talk about that too. Going viral was an odd and interesting experience. I was attacked by people on the left and called a billionaire bootlicker, while simultaneously being attacked by people on the right for being a working mom who was demonized as an example of a woman choosing her career over her family. Thankfully I can laugh at myself and I don’t take armchair keyboard ideologues too seriously. Being the main character on the timeline, even for a few minutes, requires a thick skin and a strong sense of self. The real story is pretty simple. I was given a nearly impossible deadline for his first project and as the product lead I would never ask anyone to do anything I wasn’t willing to do myself. So I worked round the clock alongside an amazing team spanning many timezones, and we delivered it on schedule – truly against the odds. It was intense but also fun. Those first few months were wildly crazy but I wanted to be there and I have no regrets. Showing up and giving it your all should, in most cases, be celebrated. Obviously you can’t work at that pace forever but there are moments where bursts are mission critical. I’ve pulled many all-nighters in my career and also when I was a student for something that mattered to me. I don’t regret putting in long hours or being ambitious, and feel proud of how far I’ve come from where I started thanks in part to that type of work ethic. I think of life as a game, and being at Twitter after the acquisition was like playing life at Level 10 on Hard Mode. Since I like taking on difficult challenges I found it interesting and rewarding because I was growing and learning so rapidly. I realize our society today trends toward polarization but when it comes to this app, its owner, and its future, I am neither a fangirl nor a hater — I’m an optimistic pragmatist. This may really irritate the internet but you cannot pigeonhole me into some radical position of either loving or hating every change that’s occurred. I escaped my fundamentalist upbringing and am a free thinker these days. Everyone can be seen as both a hero or a villain, depending on who is telling what angle of the story. Elon doesn’t deserve to be venerated or vilified. He’s a complicated person with an unfathomable amount of financial and geopolitical power which is why humanity needs him to err on the side of goodness, rather than political divisiveness and pettiness. I disagree with many of his decisions and am surprised by his willingness to burn so much down, but with enough money and time, something new & innovative may emerge. I hope it does. Sometimes I get asked about how I felt when I got laid off, and the truth is it was the best gift I’ve ever received. Sure the headlines and punchlines wrote themselves but I was battle hardened by then. I knew that I’d worked in a way where I could walk out with my head held high. I have no bitterness about the Product Management team being dismantled, and it made sense for me to exit as nearly all of the remaining PMs were let go. Going on a sabbatical afterward has been exactly what I needed to decompress and I’m finally feeling rested and relaxed. I’m a creative and a builder, so sooner than later I’ll jump back into a high intensity company but I’m grateful for this season of thinking, reading, traveling and being with people I love. After having time to reflect I believe more than ever that the very best outcomes flow from great leadership that combines the head and the heart. I’d be remiss if I didn’t note that in all of this there is also a cautionary tale for anyone who succeeds at something — which is that the higher you climb, the smaller your world becomes. It’s a strange paradox but the richest and most powerful people are also some of the most isolated. I found myself frequently looking at Elon and seeing a person who seemed quite alone because his time and energy was so purely devoted to work, which is not the model of a life I want to live. Money and fame can create psychological prisons which may worsen mental health conditions. We’ve all seen high profile cases of celebrities who end up with some combination of depression, paranoia, delusions of grandeur, mania and/or erratic behavior. Living in an echo chamber is dangerous and being at the top makes a person even more susceptible to being surrounded by yes people when nearly everyone around you is on the payroll and somehow stands to benefit from being in your orbit. Figuring out how to keep “better angels” around in the form of family, friends, and teammates is critical to staying on the rails and enduring intense ups and downs. Everyone needs to hear hard truths sometimes and if you fire all the people who speak up then the reality distortion field may just turn into a vortex. I was drawn to Twitter because I’m obsessed with the problem of loneliness and connection between people. I find it fascinating & troubling that humans are getting lonelier as we simultaneously create a world that’s both safer and wealthier. I don’t believe that trade-off has to exist, which is why I keep returning to that theme in my personal and professional life. I realize this is too long of a tweet but Twitter was a weird and special place on the internet, and I’m grateful to have played a teeny tiny role in its story and evolution. I’m here for whatever comes next — on this app and in new places. Consumer social is very much alive and at a fascinating juncture, so I’ll be watching and participating and sharing hot takes because I don’t want to, and probably can’t, turn that part of me off. Perhaps X becomes a resounding success. Or it fails epically. Either way, I expect it will continue to be a very entertaining ride. 🫡

Esther Crawford ✨

5,496,829 views • 3 years ago

We’re often told Western societies are experiencing conditions reminiscent of the German Weimar Republic. But what exactly was the German Weimar Republic? I’d like to explain the republic…and its incredible levels of debauchery, meaninglessness, sex, drugs, and—of course—Jews. “The decay of moral values in all areas of life—the period of deepest German degradation—coincided exactly with the height of Jewish power in Germany.” -Karl Wiehe Background The Weimar Republic is the unofficial name—that was popularized by Adolf Hitler—of the German nation-state that existed from November of 1918 to March of 1933. It was named for the city of Weimar, Germany where the constitutional assembly that established the new German republic met. The official name of the republic was the German Reich. The Weimar Republic was established after Germany’s loss in WWI. Germany was forced under the Treaty of Versailles to accept “full responsibility” for the war and pay the debts of all the allied countries. Being forced to pay these massive debts devastated the German economy and skyrocketed inflation, unemployment, and suicide within Germany. At one point 40% of Germans were unemployed and many were homeless. In 1932, the German suicide rate was more than three times that of Great Britain and in one two-year period, Germany had more suicides than there had been deaths of American soldiers in all of WWI. The German currency became the most worthless currency in Europe. A loaf of bread in Berlin that cost around 160 German Marks at the end of 1922, cost 200,000,000,000 German Marks by late 1923. The German peoples’ life savings and purchasing power had melted away over the course of a few months. With a single US dollar being worth 4,210,500,000,000 German Marks by November of 1923, foreign currencies had much greater buying power in Germany. So naturally, foreigners flocked to Germany to take advantage of the cheap prices. With these foreigners arriving en masse, Germans desperate for work turned to one of primary industries the foreigners flocked to Germany for: the sex industry. Sex and Drugs Germans began flocking to urban hubs in search of work, and no urban hub was more popular than Berlin. Prostitution in Berlin wasn’t explicitly legal but existed in a kind of legal gray area where certain aspects of the sex trade were regulated while others remained unregulated. However, enforcement of any laws restricting prostitution was lax to non-existent. On any given night up to 100,000 prostitutes would line the streets of Berlin. Every type of prostitute was available: midgets, pregnant prostitutes who lined up on the street according to how pregnant they were, prostitutes that purposefully tried to be ugly, prostitutes with acid-scarred faces, prostitutes with missing limbs, mother and daughter prostitute pairs, dominatrixes, even hunchback prostitutes. Interracial, inter-generational, forced or abusive sex acts were all available for the right price. There was also a large male prostitution industry and homosexual men from across Europe came to Germany to pay for homosexual sex. And unlike most cities, Berlin boasted having not a single red-light district—but multiple. Child prostitutes were bought and sold in Weimar Berlin in a booming industry. Advertisements for child prostitutes were even placed in German magazines and newspapers. A person could order a child, or any other type of prostitute for that matter, over the phone and have them a few short minutes later. British historian Sir Arthur Bryant describes throngs of child prostitutes outside the doors of the great Berlin hotels and restaurants. Bryant adds, “most of them—the night clubs and vice resorts—were owned and managed by Jews. And it was the Jews among the promoters of this trade who were remembered in after years.” There were homosexual, lesbian, and even transsexual bars where, occasionally, public masturbation and orgies took place. These homosexual bars weren’t isolated or rare one-off outliers either, there were over 50 lesbian bars in Berlin and around 100 homosexual bars total. Drag shows and cross dressing were commonplace in these bars. Sexual acts involving torture or acts bringing a victim close to death, or even—in some instances—to death were performed in Weimar Germany (called Lustmord). As often happens when violent sexual perversions arise, so too do serial killers playing out their fetishes in reality. I refuse to name serial killers in my writings because I think it glorifies them, but you can look them up yourself. German Newspapers devoted entire sections to the violent sexual crimes of these serial killers and fictional accounts of murders sold very well on German book stands. Serial Killers had a romanticized lore around them, similar to what we see in western society today. Alongside prostitution and homosexual clubs, porn also enjoyed a golden age during the Weimar Republic. Like prostitution, porn existed in a kind of legal gray area where enforcement of any regulations on it were lax to non-existent. Images could be purchased under-the-counter at most street media kiosks. According to one report there were as many as 30 homosexual publications on any given Berlin media kiosk. Above all, pornography featuring models who bore a resemblance to the biggest movie stars of the day, such as Marlene Dietrich or Greta Garbo, were in the highest demand. Fashion began to blur the lines between masculine and feminine. The female image began to experiment with a more strong-willed independent tone and some women began to dress in masculine clothing. Similarly, male fashion began to experiment with feminization and cross-dressing amongst men began to rise. Berlin’s women began to question the need for a man in their lives at all and many Berlin women had no desire to start or raise a family. Drug use in the Weimar Republic also ran rampant and Berlin gained a reputation as a drug dealing hub around Germany and Europe. Cocaine was the most popular drug in the Weimar Republic and only required a simple prescription from a doctor. That said, opium (a predecessor to heroin), morphine and amphetamines were all readily available and extensively used as well. The drug usage was so pervasive there was even experimentation with using drugs for “scientific” sexual purposes. One of the chief “scientists” behind this experimentation with sex was a man named Magnus Hirshfeld. Magnus Hirschfeld was a homosexual Jew and one of the thought leaders behind the sexual debauchery overtaking Berlin. Hirschfeld had founded political organizations that fought for the rights of homosexuals in Germany well before the Weimar era and as far back as 1896. He led the campaign to overturn a statue of German Law called Paragraph 175 which forbid homosexuality in Germany. Hirschfeld would later go on to write a 1914 book called The Homosexuality of Men and Women in which he attempted to prove homosexuality occurred in every society around the world. Hirschfeld’s crowning achievement of debauchery, however, occurred in July of 1919 when he opened The Institute of Sexual Research (Institut für Sexualwissenschaft) in Berlin. The institute’s stated purpose was to establish the sexual sciences…and establish the sexual sciences the institute did. It was at the Institute of Sexual Research where the initial rubric for the innumerable genders we see in leftism today originated. At the institute, Hirschfeld developed a system which categorized 64 possible types of sexual intermediary (aka genders) and it was Hirschfeld who coined the term transvestite in 1910 and the term transsexual in 1923. The institute even performed sex re-assignment surgery. The Institute of Sexual Research also housed a large library for any and all homosexual, transsexual, and erotic literature. The institute had places for homosexuals to stay overnight as well as some of the first counseling services specifically tailored to homosexuals. Homosexual-specific medical services were provided in the institute as well. The institute also housed the Museum of Sex, an educational resource for the public, which was reported to have been visited by school classes. I think the writer Luigi Barzini most succinctly summarized the rampant debauchery that was Weimar Berlin when he said: “I saw pimps offering anything to anybody: little boys, little girls, robust young men, libidinous women, animals. The story went the rounds that a male goose whose neck you cut at just the right ecstatic moment would give you the most delicious frisson of all—as it allowed you to enjoy sod*my, bestiality, homosexuality, necrophilia, and sadism at one stroke.” A debaucherous infestation had overtaken Berlin and nowhere was that more evident than in the arts. Art, Music, and Film Art, music, and film in Berlin were overtaken by the sexual revolution and a move toward a Jewish-influenced anti-authoritarianism as well. The Berlin film industry started releasing risqué and homosexual films. The world’s first known homosexual film—Anders als die Andern (1919)—came out in Berlin during the Weimar era and is the story a man falling in love with one of his male violin students. This film was written by and featured none other than Magnus Hirschfeld himself. Another film called Mädchen in Uniform (1931) is about a schoolgirl who falls in love with her female teacher. The two commence a forbidden love and eventually even share an on-screen lesbian kiss on the mouth. The film ends when this lesbian love is exposed and the protagonist attempts suicide. German expressionist cinema also came to prominence in the Weimar Republic. This form of cinema emphasized depicting the artist's inner emotions (no matter how crude those emotions may be) rather than attempting to replicate reality. Two of the three key figures for the German expressionist movement were the Jews Fritz Lang and Robert Wiene. The expressionist film Metropolis was one of the biggest films of the Weimar era. Metropolis’ content is emblematic of the anti-authoritarian and communist messages of German expressionist cinema. The film takes place in a futuristic city where a beautiful and cultured utopia exists above a bleak underworld populated by mistreated workers. When a privileged young man discovers the grim scene under the city, he becomes intent on helping the workers. He befriends a rebellious teacher which puts him at odds with his authoritative father. The film was directed the Jew Fritz Lang and produced by the Jew Erich Pommer. The credits of the films of the Berlin movie industry were also littered with Jews. In fact, in 1931, over 60 percent of German films were produced by Jews and 82 percent of film scripts were written by Jews. In the art scene, a thoroughly anti-authoritarian and communist movement called Dada arose. The Dadaist movement was comprised of artists who rejected the logic, reason, and aestheticism of modern capitalist society, instead expressing nonsense, irrationality, and anti-bourgeois protest in their works. Dadaist works opposed any type of authority and made fun of far-right figures, including Hitler himself. According to Wikipedia, some sources claim the Dadaist movement was founded by a group of Jewish modernist artists. In music, one of the most popular singers of the day was a woman who was largely regarded as “the first official lesbian of Berlin” named Claire Waldoff. Waldoff dressed masculine and made no secret of her sexuality while actively trying to convert other culturally important women to become lesbian. One culturally important woman Waldoff succeeded in converting to bisexuality was one of the biggest movie stars in the world, Marlene Dietrich. Marlene was famous for pushing social norms and sometimes wore a tuxedo, helping to erode the image of traditionally masculine and traditionally feminine roles. Marlene credits Clarie Waldoff as “introducing her to lesbian love”. Marlene Deitrich was openly bisexual and an icon for homosexual women around the world when no other homosexual icons existed. One newspaper dubbed Dietrich “perhaps the busiest and most passionate bisexual in theatrical Berlin.” Anita Berber was one of the most popular nude dancers of the Weimar Republic and danced to songs with titles like, suicide, morphiem, and mad house. One of her husbands was also openly homosexual. In one famous story about Anita, she was being ignored by one of the tables she was dancing for, so she went over to the table, stood on top of it, and started peeing on the table while drinking their champagne. What a gal… Architecture One aesthetic element that I think tends to be overlooked in most writings on social decay is architecture. It should come as no surprise that the principal architecture movement of the Weimar Republic—called expressionist architecture—also took a turn from an aesthetic focused on beauty and perfection toward an aesthetic that focused on “distortion of form to create an emotional effect”. This is architecture that’s generally perceived as hideous or repulsive. I’d also argue there’s a larger psychological component to this expressionist architecture. This ugly architecture contributes to social decay by glorifying the more disgusting elements of society and humanity. It subconsciously undermines the idea that society should strive for perfection and instead is a call to accept society’s more heinous elements. This repulsive architecture is, in my view, anti-authoritarian and destructive to social norms. Two of the key architects of the expressionist architecture movement were the Jews Bruno Taut and Erich Mendelsohn. Jews One of the key factors in Hitler’s rise to power was his opposition of the Jewish influence inside Berlin. As such, this article would be incomplete without looking at the Jewish influence that existed inside Berlin or—possibly more importantly—the German public’s perception of the Jewish influence inside Berlin. Here are some of the figures I think best illustrate the Jewish over-representation in the Weimar Republic. All these figures should be viewed in consideration of this fact: Jews made up less than 1% (.09%) of the German population in the years of the Weimar Republic. In my opinion, these figures are staggering primarily because of the Jews’ immense over-representation in major positions of power within German society. Politics • The author of the 1919 German constitution was the Jew Hugo Preuss. • One quarter of the members of the 8-person Council of the People's Deputies that established the Weimar Republic were Jews (Otto Landesberg and Hugo Haase). • The main competing faction against the official Weimar government was headed by the Jew Kurt Eisner. • The SPD (Social Democratic Party of Germany) was the political party that primarily ran the Weimar Republic. 22% of the entirety of the SPD were Jews. • The SPD’s main political theorist was a Jew: Eduard Bernstein • Two of the political thinkers most respected by the SPD were Jews: Ferdinand Lassalle, Leopold Sonnemann. • SPD's “foremost theoretician of this century” was the Jew Rudolf Hilferding. • SPD Key Figure, industrialist, and political thinker Walther Rathenau was a Jew. • The Vice President of the Berlin Police was the jew Bernhard Weiss. • In the first Weimar administration Vice Chancellor Eugen Schiffer was Jewish as was Weimar Interior Minister Erich Koch-Weser. • 15% of the members of the Reichstag (German Parliament) were Jewish. • A large number of the members of the political elite of the Weimar Republic were Jews: Rosa Luxemburg, Paul Levi, Ernst Toller, Erich Muhsam, Gustav Landauer, Eugen Levine, and Karl Radek. The Press • The Ullstein Press was the publisher of many of the largest German newspapers and was owned by the Jew Leopold Ullstein. • The Berliner Iliustrirte Zeitung was one of the largest German newspapers. It was Published by the Ullstein Press and its chief editor was the Jew Kurt Korff. • The Vossische Zeitung was another of the largest German newspapers and was published by the Ullstein Press. Its chief editor was the Jew Georg Bernhard. • Another of the othe r largest newspaper publishers was the Jew Rudolf Mosse. • The Berliner Tageblatt was the largest of Rudolf Mosse’s newspapers and its chief editor was the Jew Theodor Wolff • Editor-in-chief of the SPD’s party paper Vorwärts was the Jew Friedrich Stampfer The Arts • The Jew Erich Pommer was a German-born film producer and executive. According to Wikipedia, “Pommer was perhaps the most powerful person in the German and European film industries in the 1920s and early 1930s.” • In 1931, over 60 percent of German films were produced by Jews and 82 percent of film scripts were written by Jewish writers. • Two of the three key figures for the largest film movement of the Weimar era—the German expressionist movement—were the Jews Fritz Lang and Robert Wiene. • Two of the key Architects of the expressionist architecture movement were the Jews Bruno Taut and Erich Mendelsohn. • Some of the most influential producers, directors, & actors in Weimar cinema were Jews as well to name a few: Paul Davidson, Joseph Mandel, Jules Greenbaum, Max Reinhardt, Josef Von Sternberg, Fritz Kohn, Otto Wallburg, Peter Lowenstein. • To conclude the arts, some claim the anti-authoritarian and thoroughly communist Dadaist movement was founded by a group of Jewish modernist artists. Sex • Magnus Hirschfeld was Jewish. He was dubbed "the Einstein of Sex". He was president of World League of Sexual Reform and of course, founder of the Institute for Sexual Research. • Ivan Bloch was Jewish and is often called the "first Sexologist". • As quoted by Sir Arthur Bryant earlier, “most of them—the night clubs and vice resorts—were owned and managed by Jews. And it was the Jews among the promoters of this trade who were remembered in after years.” Other notable Jewish over-representations: (**Please Note** these next five bullet points are not official numbers and are from a NSDAP piece that was distributed in Weimar Germany. I'm including them because although I can't be completely sure of their accuracy, I think they most likely do generally represent the amalgamations of Jewish power in Weimar society. And, at the very least, these numbers represent the German public’s perception of Jewish amalgamations of power in Weimar society): • 56% of notaries were Jews. • 52% of doctors were Jews. • 45% of Hospital Directors were Jews. • 48% of lawyers were Jews. • 35% of dentists were Jews. One last note on the Jews of the Weimar Republic. I included a link with more detail below, but many Weimar Jews actively tried to conceal their Jewish identity and even went so far as bragging to other Jews when gentiles were unable to identify them. This is one of the reasons that, to this day, it’s somewhat difficult to identify who the Jews of the Weimar Republic were. What this means is that, although the identity of every Jew I list is verified, there are undoubtedly other prominent and non-prominent Jews I was unable to identify. The provided list should not be viewed as wholly representative of the Jewish influence within Weimar Germany. But even just considering the provided list, you can see the Jewish influence was substantial for a race of people comprising less than 1% of the total German population. This Jewish over-representation is even more substantial when you consider that many of these Jewish amalgamations of over-representation occurred within many of Germany’s most important social, political, and economic institutions. The Weimar Republic was often referred to as the "Juden Republic" (Jew's Republic) by Germans. I think it's easy to see why... Enter the National Socialists After Hitler’s rise to power in 1933, Goebbels and the Brownshirts began shutting down the homosexual dive bars that had risen to prominence during the Weimar Republic. They made one of the most popular homosexual bars in Berlin their headquarters after shutting it down. They pillaged Magnus Hirschfeld’s Institute for Sexual Research and Hirschfeld’s books on transsexual ideology were some of the first books the National Socialists burned. From Wikipedia itself, the books the National Socialists burned were: • Writings on sexuality and sexual education which serve the egocentric pleasure of the individual and thus, destroy the principles of race and Volk. • Pornography and explicit literature. • Pacifist literature. • All books degrading German purity. • Literature by Jewish authors, regardless of the field. • Popular entertainment literature that depicts life and life's goals in a superficial, unrealistic and sickly sweet manner, based on a bourgeois or upper class view of life. • The works of traitors, emigrants and authors from foreign countries who believe they can attack and denigrate the new Germany. • The literature of Marxism, Communism and Bolshevism. • Literature with liberal, democratic tendencies and attitudes, and writings supporting the Weimar Republic. • Books that advocate "art" which is decadent, bloodless, or purely constructivist. • The decadent, destructive and Volk-damaging writings of "Asphalt and Civilization" literati • Patriotic kitsch in literature. • All historical writings whose purpose is to denigrate the origin, the spirit and the culture of the German Volk, or to dissolve the racial and structural order of the Volk, or that denies the force and importance of leading historical figures in favor of egalitarianism and the masses, and which seeks to drag them through the mud. Very quickly after Hitler’s rise to power in 1933, the chief purveyors of the degeneracy that had overtaken Berlin would leave the city and National Socialist Germany would rise from its ashes. The rest—as they say—is history. (Sources and further reading in the comments below)

Bobby Thorne

67,770 views • 1 year ago

"I have graphs, I've looked at the Google Analytics, the data does not lie. Every single time, starting in April 2024, that Jen McCabe would become the subject of public attention --It happens at specific discrete moments on the timeline-- you see a bump in the attention paid to Lindsey Gaetani." "And there's no doubt in my mind that Brian Tully's MSP unit --when they had Michael Morrissey make that video, when McCabe's friends or family or whatever, when they all got him to make that video, and that didn't work, and when Morrissey had to recuse, when things got so bad that they had no other out, and the TurtleRiders would not pay attention to anyone but those Karen Read and John O'Keefe witnesses-- Tully, Kate Peter and their people said, "all right, we're left with no other option. Lindsey Gaetani looks like a good distraction. Let's release her phone." And then that cycle repeated over and over and over and over again. And Lindsey's not the only one who's been subject to this. You wanna talk about what's going on to Estey? Even what's going on with Deanna? With Meredith?" TRANSCRIPT: And people wonder why I get so passionate about this. This is nothing I haven't talked about before, but you are not gonna tell me, me, of all people --I'm not gonna speak for Lindsey-- but you are not gonna tell me that the release of Lindsey Gaetani's cell phone extraction did not have serious, serious ramifications. Like, I can't even conceptualize what the impact was on Lindsey and her family's life. I don't think my life was ever the same again after April of 2024. As traumatized as I was from that December 2023 court hearing, what happened in April of 2024 was the worst thing that I have ever seen happen to any human being in my entire life. [Speaking to chat] Oh, hi Lindsey, how are you? I've just never seen anything that horrific, the leak of that cell phone extraction, the impact that it had, the fact that no one even understood how severe it was because people were so distracted by the polemics of it. People were so "excited" to be able to smear Lindsey and the distraction was so powerful that no one asked, one, why did this happen? Or two, what was the impact? And that's what really got me so passionate and furious about this. It wasn't an issue of substantive guilt or innocence about anyone. It was that I was seeing the same exact stuff happen in this situation to people without political connections that I saw happen to the staff of the CCC when really powerful men started getting very, very, very close to each other in positions of power and then when they would do bad things to women, they would just talk to each other. One guy would run the HR department, the other guy would run the executive director position, and somebody else would have a connection to the appointing authority. And so any complaint would just be what's called "caught and killed." And I said, there is no way that this is gonna happen again. When it was happening in the CCC, it was an administrative regulatory agency. At least there was some sort of semblance of check and balance. It wasn't egregious because everyone had a lot of influence, even the people who were staffers. This situation, we had state police officers, people who, if you were listening to the just the narrative of the people who were supporting the Justice for John O'Keefe movement, you would think that Michael Proctor's infallible. You would think Brian Tully's infallible. You would think Kate Peter's infallible, which means incapable of fault. That's nonsense. I'm telling you right now, that's nonsense, and that's why it was so easy for this stuff to manifest. And that's why I became so personally concerned. Forget about what developed from April to April of 2024 until now. That's why I was so upset because I watched what happened from December of 2023 through to April of 2024. And that enough was so egregious, so wrong, such an abuse of trust, such an abuse of the justice system that I said, there is no way that I can just stand by and be apathetic about this, no matter what the price, no matter what the obstacles, no matter what the pressures. And I can't tell you how bad it was --it tore families apart, these cases-- if you didn't live through it. It tore communities apart. I don't believe anyone in Massachusetts around this area, 128 or Dedham or whatever, was able to live a life that was not impacted in some way by this case. Okay, these cases, the TurtleBoy case, Karen Read case, et cetera, et cetera. It frustrates me to no end that somehow within that high-profile situation, there were people who started to control the narrative because they had things to hide. And that's why I started this space, because I truly believe that the real secrets lying beneath what was really going on with Michael Proctor and Brian Tully and Kate Peter and the PI, Marty Kraft and Jen McCabe and Yuri Bukhenik and John Fanning and Nick Guarino. What I really believe was going on was that they were worried that the attention brought onto that unit by the John O'Keefe and Karen Read case was gonna spill their secrets about Birchmore. And it led them to double down and commit even more egregious acts in the context of some of this other behavior, like leaking Lindsey Gaetani's cell phone extraction. And that's, again, you wanna talk about the timeline from April 2024 until now, we can do that too. But what I'll tell you is the story ends up being the same. I have graphs, I've looked at the Google Analytics, the data does not lie. Every single time starting in April 2024, that Jen McCabe would become the subject of public attention. It happens at specific, specific discrete moments on the timeline. You see a bump in the attention paid to Lindsey. And there's no doubt in my mind that this unit, when they had Michael Morrissey make that video, when McCabe's friends or family or whatever, when they all got him to make that video, and that didn't work. When Morrissey had to recuse, when things got so bad that they had no other out and the TurtleRiders would not pay attention to anyone but those Karen Read and John O'Keefe witnesses, Tully and his people said, "all right, we're left with no other option. Lindsey Gaetani looks like a good distraction. Let's release her phone." And then that cycle repeated over and over and over and over again. And Lindsey's not the only one who's been subject to this. You wanna talk about what's going on to Estey? Even what's going on with Deanna? With Meredith? What's going on with a lot of these people, right? There were PIs and moles in the internet saying that Lindsey was that and separating that. There were PIs, moles and various people in the end, just sort of people who were trying to either support Karen or support a movement that they could believe in or whatever it was, who got exploited, who got ran by various people for intel purposes to feed information back to their various handlers. And when they became expendable, they got burned. You watch, look at these emails sent to all these people's schools, the mass emails. That can't be a coincidence. Whoever it benefits can't be a coincidence, all right? It's a coordinated tactic. It's designed to put public attention on very specific people when otherwise damaging information gets released. And what have we seen over the past, let's say from April 2024 until now, what have we seen? That over and over and over again, all right? Every time something would happen, there'd be a new distraction. And then as we got through the end of the Karen Read and John O'Keefe case, what did we see? Yes, there were some real, real secrets lying beneath in terms of this case. And I mean it, I mean it with every bone and fiber in my towel body. There were secrets about the Birchmore case. There were secrets about that phone extraction. There were secrets about the inside baseball and the communications between Tully and Kate and Tully and Jen McCabe and Michael Morrissey and Kate and Michael Morrissey and Jen McCabe. And as it all started to come out and as it crescendoed folks over the past few months to the point where Michael Proctor's own attorney was basically making misrepresentations to the court about the existence of 12 years of cell phone records. When he had Kate Peter deleting evidence from Google Drives that were submitted as formal records to grand juries in the Kearney proceedings. When you have a special prosecutor statute that is so broken, it allows a DA rather than complying with the court order to appoint a new special prosecutor to just no-cross cases. So that stuff like what we've been talking about doesn't come out. It's indefensible. But what is the karmic justice here? It is that for whatever reason, Michael Proctor's cell phone records which I truly believe were captured and swept up by the feds during their federal probe of either Farwell or Tully's unit or John O'Keefe's death, whatever it was, exposing a lot of this. It's not just the Rule 14 discovery related to Kate Peter and otherwise and Tully that was turned over in the Aidan Kearney case, the 5,000 pages of material. Initially 4,000 pages of it was mysteriously just blank. It's not just that folks. It's also the, hey, Michael Proctor's cell phone until months ago, August of 2025 was hidden from the public. It was hidden from criminal defendants until someone somewhere must have informed Michael Proctor that a full copy of that cell phone already existed so there was no point in him continuing to hide it. What does this speak to? Well, it speaks to why I started this space today because in light of everything I just laid out from memory. I wanted to see if there was a single person who would be willing to stand up here and defend Michael Proctor's state police unit, Ryan Tully, John Fanning, Yuri Bukhenik, any of them or Kate Peter or Jen McCabe. Not because of their actions necessarily in the John O'Keefe and Karen Read case but because of everything I just laid out and the silence would let it speak volumes because how are you possibly going to counter any of that? This is what I'm doing from memory sitting here while trying to challenge people to a debate. That is just a part of the historical record. I cannot put into words how much more expansive in scope some of this story is and it's not any one person's story to tell. Let me also go on a rant about this. I'm getting so frustrated with the possessive approach that some people take to some of this coverage. Do you care about what was done to the most vulnerable? I don't care if you think of Karen as vulnerable, Lindsey is vulnerable, Sandra Birchmore is vulnerable, whoever you think of as vulnerable. Do you care about what happened to them? Do you care about righting the wrongs? Do you care about actually talking about the misconduct or are you trying to make a polemical point in furtherance of some specific platform that either you run or you support? What are you trying to accomplish? And I think a lot of us recently have been forced to have some very difficult moral reckoning. Okay, because a lot of us were tricked. I felt absolutely tricked into supporting Michael Proctor. If I knew, I'm not saying about the merits of the John O'Keefe investigation. If I knew then, back in 2023, 2024, what I know now about what's on that phone and about what that unit was willing to do, I never would have supported them. We supported Lindsey, but I never would have supported that unit. I'm sorry. Nope, never would have done it. And that's why I want to talk about people became very possessive about coverage of this case. Reporters are supposed to fade into the background. It's not supposed to be about us. Yes, maybe you have some skills. The reporter, people are interested. You use those skills to get a following so you can tell a story and get the facts out there, but it's not supposed to be about us. If a reporter is the centerpiece of a story, they have failed. Okay, you just blend in the background. We make sure that the people who are the most harmed, their voices are centered. And then we make sure these predatory vultures, like Kate Peter, are unable to manipulate public narratives to protect entrenched systemic power structures. That's what it's all about. So for me, that's why I get so frustrated. That's why I wanted to do this space because I wanted to make a point that when forced to actually debate on merit, all the propaganda mouthpieces will run from the chance. They're happy to get up and shit talk other people when it's a space they control, and they don't have to address the merits. But you put them in a position where they don't control the space and they're forced to debate on merit and they'll run from it. So in some sense, I made my point. But I also think it's an important exercise in telling this story, in explaining where I'm coming from. I think there are a lot of us that are all coming to the same position, which is it doesn't matter what various camp we may have been in or what not. We're not defined by that. We are just individual humans who have a bunch of views on different cases. And at the end of the day, a lot of us, more so, I think than people realize, actually care about systemic reform. We're not in it to protect Kate Peter or Jen McCabe or Brian Tully or anybody. We're here to hold people to equal standards and ask that the justice system do the same. And I think that's a noble goal. That's something that I can believe in. I wish people would be willing to debate it, though. It frustrates me. It really frustrates me. And, you know, maybe that's the nature of it. Maybe it's that making this point requires showing the litany of evidence, showing the sort of timeline, showing the overlapping concentric social circles, talking about these people, talking about what they did, talking about the implications, talking about where this is going. That's what cuts out the propaganda. To me, everyone is capable of fault. I said this the other day. If there are people out there in your orbit who are telling you that they are incapable of fault, they're a threat to the United States. They're the most dangerous, pernicious force we can imagine. Everyone's capable of fault. And we should look to the people who, in spite of their faults, try to leave the world a better place than what they found when they arrived. I think there are those of us. In spite of absolutely inculcating incredible odds who have somehow managed to get to a point where we've centered the voices, we're not there yet, where we're centering the voices who are actually impacted by all this. And if that happens, mark my words, it will not be because of any large media platforms or networks or anything. It will be in spite of them. It will be in spite of their impact inside dealing in spite of the documentary contracts, in spite of the news networks. It will be because a small group of well-meaning people were willing to band together and say, everything else aside, we can stand behind what's right. It may not be a form of right that we all agree on, but starting from that place, instead of from a place of hatred or otherwise, is a good step. I don't know where this is going. I don't know where it's going. I know that no one will stand up here and defend Kate Peter and Brian Tully, at least in a debate with me where I control the playing field. Can you blame them? But I don't know where this is going. You're on my prediction. As someone who's, I think I've not lived this as much as some other people, but I've lived it a lot. It's been a lot. And I'm never gonna understand the impact that this had on the people who had directly impacted, but it's been a lot on a lot of people. The story has impacted many lives. Even myself, with the perspective I have, kind of sitting back here on my veranda, you can call me Thomas Jefferson Towel. I don't have any hemp though, or do I? Sitting on my veranda, kind of looking forward, right here, all right? I got my public records request back today. I know when a public records request denial is like, oh, we want to stonewall this because there's something there. And I'm getting that vibe related to the contacts between the Norfolk DA's office and the Mass AGO's office between September 25th and October 24th of 2025 related to whether the Norfolk DA reached out to appoint a new special prosecutor in the Lindsey Gaetani and Aidan Kearney cases. But as I'm sitting here on my veranda with my eyes closed, I don't have a veranda. I have a desk. I'm a little towel. As I'm sitting here with my eyes closed, I can see the future materializing, okay? There's only certain roads that this can go down. There are only so many pathways left. There's a reckoning coming, folks. Whether it's a reckoning by way of the Sandra Birchmore cover-up, whether it's a reckoning by way of Michael Proctor's attempt to hide a substantial amount of evidence across a substantial number of criminal cases, whether it's related to Kate Peter's involvement in the handling of evidence in the still remaining Aidan Kearney cases. You can sense the anticipation. You can sense the apprehension and anxiety. And you can sense imminent closure. I'm not saying that is gonna be an easy process. I'm not saying it's gonna be a short process. But I'm saying there's something in the air. It's undeniable. There's little left to defend. There's not a single person, troll or otherwise anonymous account or whatever, who would stand up here today right now and with me and try to defend Kate Peter and Brian Tully. I gave you the chance. There's a time, if I had done this space a year ago, oh, people would have been jumping at the bit. No one will do it. No one. Why? Because we're at the end of the road. What Proctor did was indefensible, not in the Read O'Keefe case, although he should never have used those words about Karen. I'd critique him if he was a private citizen, although obviously I'm protective of women, right? But say what you will about that. I wouldn't use those words in private. That man used them in his capacity as a police officer. Right? Not to mention the other defendants' cases that were impacted by whatever Proctor and Sean Goode and whoever else was on that text chain and whatever else is on that phone is gonna lead to. You can sense it. You can sense the reckoning coming. The question is, back to Watergate in the '70s, there was a member of the House of Representatives during the impeachment hearings in '74. We had a very famous phrase. "What did the President know and when did he know?" Folks, the phrase of our era will be, "What did Michael Morrissey know and when did he know it?" This cannot start and end with justice for any single person involved in this. This is not about any one person at this point. This is about a system of justice in Massachusetts that I suppose was not about justice long before any of us realized it was teetering on the brink of collapse. Annie Dookhan was a warning that we all ignored to our peril. I should have seen it when they somehow got Lindsey that same lawyer that Annie Dookhan had. I should have seen it. It's not—I didn't realize until last week that lawyer George was a handler. Dookhan could create a huge—it could have created huge exposure for some people in the state police. It's incredible. If somebody painted the picture of the power structure that was at play here. Karen Read, when she said she was afraid of these people, I didn't—when she said it in the text or something and somebody leaked it. When I first started covering this case, I would not have got it. I don't know what it had been like. What do you mean? They're a state police unit. Like, yeah, they're paramilitary. Like, if you're a criminal, you should fear them, but they're not scary. Right now, after some of the stuff, and I'm talking about half the stuff I've seen as people pull, they horrifying. I think they're cornered, by the way. I don't think there's much they can do. They're getting a little desperate, burning a lot of their agents and their moles. And that's why I sense some kind of reckoning coming. You don't burn deep cover moles. I think Deanna was a mole for Kate for a while. You don't burn somebody like that unless it's almost over. Same thing with Kristy, the way Kristy's been burning everybody. I don't know who the hell she was working for, but whatever she's doing has got to be close to over because you don't burn everybody down unless it's almost over. So why is it almost over, folks? Why? What's coming? Some combination of all of this stuff. And if you want my fundamental prediction, let me give it to you like this. I don't like that it's coming to this, but it's a political question. It's a question of what the narrative is going to be. You don't just, as everyone now knows, you don't just prosecute people because they do things wrong. There's always a decision tree. So what do the feds want out of this? The people who were involved in the cover-up of Sandra Birchmore's murder, whoever was the father of Sandra's unborn child, you know, it's not that Matt Farwell. Well, and then they obviously want this MSP unit. Okay, Michael Proctor, that cell phone, didn't just get cloned. It was a setup. They let Proctor lie to the judge about all those cases and all the cell phone records. And as soon as his lawyer filed the document, they moved on him. He must be under federal investigation. How did Aidan Kearney get those text messages from Jen McCabe to KF and Allie McCabe? Those were removed from Jen McCabe's extraction. The feds cloned her phone too, just like Aidan told Lindsey in those text messages as part of Exhibit O from November 28, 2023. Why did the feds clone Jen McCabe's phone? To see what Jen would withhold in the Rule 14 process. She didn't get banged up on charges federally, so she must have not done anything that bad. Something, however, is going to happen to Proctor, in turn, legally on the federal level. You can sense it. You can sense it. They're going to indict him. But for what? But then it leaves Tully, which was what this whole stream is about. We have the email from Tully. Forget about whether it's normal procedure for Tully to instruct Proctor to look into all the defense witnesses. We now know that Proctor was not running that case. It was Tully. It was all Brian Tully. What was the meme that I put up today? I really like this one. It says, the nine most terrifying words in the English language are, "I'm Brian Tully and I'm here to help." Attributed to Ronald Reagan. My point is though, it was Brian Tully. Look at it. Kate was his little, I don't know, what do we want to call, how can we say this nicely? You know, I'm trying to rise above and encourage more reasonable, respectful discourse. So Kate was his little, this is so hard. All right, let me, let me say a prayer here. Come on, now you can do this. Okay. So, there are so many words I want to use. Kate was his little assistant. I know, I know. You were expecting something wonderful. Every single thing that I was going to say there was going to be cruel, so I'm sorry. Kate was his little assistant, his little PI there. And then, I'm going to turn it around, nightmare PI Moms, version 2, Kate Peter, Jen McCabe, let's go down the seaport. Kate Peter was his little PI until he was quarterbacking all this. I think it was Morrissey who was even cut out of the loop a little bit, although I'm not sure he wasn't more involved than I'm willing to say right now. And you can see why it happened. Because when Morrissey recused in October of 2023 from the Aidan Kearney cases, and what became the Aidan Kearney and Karen Read investigations that are still ongoing, he didn't really recuse. He just had Tully and Kate running it. I started to wonder if Jen McCabe was like a PI for a case she was a witness on. I'm really starting to wonder that.

Grant Smith Ellis

17,939 views • 8 months ago

I am the Senior Vice President of Late Night Strategy at CBS. I am the person who turned a comedian into a priest and charged advertisers to watch the congregation. I want to be precise about what I built. Not a comedy show. A permission structure. For eleven years, six million Americans tuned in every night to find out what they were allowed to believe by morning. We didn't sell jokes. We sold certainty. Certainty costs nothing to produce. People will pay anything for it. We charged $50 million a year and still lost money because it turns out permission is even cheaper than we thought. In 2014, we had a genuinely dangerous comedian. A man who once testified before Congress in character as a fictional conservative pundit and made the entire chamber look like they'd been pantsed on C-SPAN. His fake persona was the most brilliant satire on television. Layered. Ironic. Unpredictable. The character could say anything because nothing was real. The character was the art. The character was the comedian. We killed the character and put the real man on stage. The real man was a lecturer. Earnest. Thoughtful. Correct about everything. Correct is not funny. Correct is not dangerous. Correct is the absence of danger. We promoted the absence of danger and called it growth. His character could make a Senate committee squirm. The real him makes an audience nod. Nodding pays the same as squirming. Nodding is easier to produce. His final words on air were "We love doing this show for you, but what we really, really love is doing this show with you." The audience wept. I wrote that line. Not the words. The architecture that made those words feel true. For eleven years, the audience believed they were participants. They were not participants. They were the product. "With you" is what you say to a congregation. A comedian says "at you." We hadn't said "at you" since 2015. Our internal metric was called Affirm Rate. It measured the percentage of monologue segments that generated applause instead of laughter. I invented this metric. I also invented the bonus structure tied to it. In 2015, our Affirm Rate was 34%. By 2022, it was 94%. I received a raise every year. We are crushing it. At the things I made up. That's performance management. But I need to tell you about the real discovery. The one I put in a deck called "Content Strategy 2019-2024." The one that got me promoted. Agreement gets applause. I knew that early. But correction — telling the audience their vocabulary is slightly outdated, their outrage is aimed two degrees off-center, their feelings are valid but their phrasing needs work — correction gets them back tomorrow. Agreement is a transaction. Correction is a subscription. We converted a comedy show into a nightly software update for moral vocabulary. Churn was near zero. They couldn't afford to miss an episode. Missing an episode meant using last week's words in this week's meeting. That's social death. We monetized the fear of social death and called it entertainment. I want to be honest about something. The content was not bipartisan. We chose a side. But I need you to understand: we did not choose it because we believed in it. We chose it because that side's audience is more responsive to correction. They want to be updated. They want to be told their language is outdated. They experience correction as care. The other side does not respond to correction. They respond to provocation. Provocation is harder to monetize. You can't build a subscription on provocation because the audience doesn't come back to learn — they come back to fight. Fighting is unpredictable. Correction is scheduled. We optimized for the audience that wants to be told what to think. That audience leaned one direction. That's not ideology. That's market segmentation. The writers' room had a whiteboard. In 2015 it said "What's funny?" In 2018 it said "What should they feel?" By 2021 it said "What are they still saying wrong?" I watched that whiteboard evolve like a finch beak and I never intervened. The market was speaking. We listened. Listening to the market is the same as leading the audience. They can't tell the difference. A writer named Marcus raised his hand in 2019. "What if we just tried to make them laugh again?" I thanked him for his passion and scheduled a creative alignment conversation. He transferred to streaming development within the month. The Affirm Rate the week he left was 91%. Laughter would have brought it down. That's risk management. Here is what nobody will say out loud. I will say it because I am proud of it. We made our audience worse at politics. Not better. Worse. Every night for eleven years, we expressed their outrage for them. Professionally. With a band and good lighting. And because the outrage had been expressed — because a man in a suit had furrowed his brow with the precise calibrated degree of indignation — they didn't need to express it themselves. They watched. They clapped. They felt the catharsis of resistance without resisting anything. They went to bed having done nothing and feeling like they'd done something. That's the product. Not comedy. Not information. Catharsis. Catharsis is the enemy of action. A man who has screamed into a pillow does not then also scream in the street. We were the pillow. A $50 million pillow with a house band. If you feel the outrage has been expressed for you, you will not march. You will not organize. You will not call your representative. You will tune in tomorrow to feel it expressed again. That's retention. Our retention was extraordinary. I want to talk about the comedy-to-catechism pipeline because I think people underestimate what we achieved. Stage one: comedian makes jokes about the powerful. Audience laughs because the powerful are absurd. This is the Carlin model. The jester punches up. Everyone below feels relief. Stage two: comedian makes jokes about people who disagree with the audience. Audience laughs because disagreement is stupid. The jester has turned around. He's still on the stage but now he's facing the crowd with a pointer. Stage three: comedian stops making jokes. Comedian identifies incorrect beliefs and explains why they're dangerous. Audience does not laugh. Audience claps. The jester is gone. In his place: a hall monitor with a desk and a band. Stage four: audience watches not for entertainment but for certification. Having seen last night's episode means you know which words are current. Not having seen it means you might use yesterday's vocabulary in today's meeting. The show is no longer comedy. It is a credential. Watching it means you are educated. Not watching means you are the person being discussed. We made a show that you watch to prove you're not the kind of person who doesn't watch it. That's a closed loop. Closed loops don't need content. They need continuity. We provided continuity for $50 million a year. A comedian — whose entire historical function was to say things too dangerous for anyone else to say — became the person who decides which things are too dangerous for anyone to say. And the audience applauded. Every night. For 2,500 nights. Because being told what is forbidden feels exactly like being told what you already knew. Prohibition performed as validation. I put that in the deck too. Our audience was correct about everything. I know this because they applauded everything we said. The applause proved the correctness. The correctness justified the applause. We called this audience research. The methodology was peer-reviewed by the audience. They approved unanimously. Every night. The actually funny comedians left. They went to podcasts. To clubs. To rooms where the audience doesn't know what's coming and that uncertainty is the point. They took the laughter with them. We kept the applause. We called those spaces problematic. That's market differentiation. The problematic spaces are funnier. But funny is not our product. We lost $40 million a year. We didn't lose it because the show failed. We lost it because we spent $50 million producing what a podcast host in his garage gives away between mattress ads. The podcast is funnier. The podcast is more dangerous. The podcast has an audience that laughs instead of claps. But we had the Ed Sullivan Theater. We had 461 seats. We had a former Beatle play the farewell episode. Paul McCartney, Elvis Costello, Jon Batiste, and Louis Cato playing "Hello, Goodbye" like it was a benediction. I booked a Beatle for a funeral. The Beatles played that stage in 1964 and the audience screamed so loud you couldn't hear the music. Our audience didn't scream. They wept politely. That's the difference between entertainment and church. We ran a church. Jon Stewart showed up to the finale and did a bit where he pretended to deliver a corporate statement from Paramount about the cancellation. The audience laughed. It was the first time they laughed in a way I didn't recognize. Involuntary. Surprised. Dangerous. For ninety seconds, a comedian was in that building. Then it was over. John Oliver said "At some point, this may come for all of our shows" and then added "but Stephen, what's important to remember is that tonight, it is going to eat you." The audience laughed again. Involuntary again. Two moments of actual comedy in a three-hour farewell. Both of them about death. The finale drew 6.74 million viewers. Biggest weeknight audience in our history. More people came to the funeral than ever visited the patient. I know what they were mourning. Not comedy. The comedy died in 2016. Not the man. The man is fine. He's wealthy. What they mourned was the permission structure. Starting today, they have to decide what to believe on their own. They have to form an opinion without waiting for a man behind a desk to form it first and deliver it with a knowing look. Some of them haven't done that since 2015. The funeral wasn't for the show. It was for the certainty. He joked about the Peanuts theme music licensing cost on his last night. "Oh no! I hope this doesn't cost CBS any money!" The audience laughed. It was a joke about money. About the network losing money. The last joke was about money. Not about truth. Not about power. About a licensing fee for a cartoon piano riff. Eleven years and the final joke was about accounting. I think that's perfect. The show was always about accounting. We just dressed it up as conscience. The President of the United States — the man we spent eleven years explaining was dangerous to an audience that already believed he was dangerous — posted an AI-generated video of our host being thrown into a dumpster on the Late Show set. Then Trump danced to "YMCA" in the clip. Viewed more times in four hours than our farewell managed in a week. His production cost: zero. Ours: negative $50 million a year. We manufactured his relevance every night at 11:35 for eleven years and he never paid us a dime. We were his marketing department. He turned our funeral into content. His ROI was infinite. Ours required a write-off and a farewell concert. The Strike Force Five — Fallon, Kimmel, Meyers, Oliver — appeared in a segment about late-night losing "one middle-aged white man who makes jokes about the news." They were joking about their own obsolescence. All of them know. None of them will say it. The format is dead. The audience moved to phones. The phones don't have desks or bands. The phones have men in garages who are allowed to be wrong, allowed to be surprised, allowed to say something their audience hasn't already approved. That's comedy. We stopped doing that a decade ago. We did approval. Approval looks like comedy from a distance. Up close it's church. I do not feel guilt. Guilt would require me to believe I took something from them. I didn't take anything. They came to us. Every night. They chose the catechism over the comedy. They preferred correction over surprise. Certainty over danger. Instruction over laughter. They wanted to be told. Not challenged. Not shocked. Not made to laugh against their will at something they didn't see coming. They wanted to see it coming. They wanted to mouth along. That's not comedy. That's karaoke. We ran the most expensive karaoke bar in television history and the only miscalculation was charging a cover when the songs are free on every phone. We turned a jester into a priest. We turned an audience into a congregation. We turned laughter into obedience. We turned political engagement into passive consumption. We turned a comedy show into a permission structure and charged $50 million a year to tell people what they already believed in a voice slightly nicer than their own. They were so grateful they showed up to mourn us. 6.74 million of them. Weeping. For the certainty. Applause is more reliable than laughter. I proved it. The proof cost $450 million, one character, one comedian's capacity for danger, and one audience's willingness to act. The metric went up.

Peter Girnus 🦅

2,106,223 views • 2 months ago