Video yükleniyor...

Video Yüklenemedi

Bu video yüklenirken bir sorun oluştu. Bu geçici bir ağ sorunundan kaynaklanıyor olabilir veya video kullanılamıyor olabilir.

Ana Sayfaya Dön

.Secretary Antony Blinken: "𝐇𝐚𝐦𝐚𝐬 𝐜𝐨𝐮𝐥𝐝 𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐞𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐨𝐧 𝐎𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐛𝐞𝐫 𝟖𝐭𝐡 𝐛𝐲 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐡𝐢𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐛𝐞𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐝 𝐜𝐢𝐯𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐚𝐧𝐬, 𝐛𝐲 𝐩𝐮𝐭𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐝𝐨𝐰𝐧 𝐢𝐭𝐬 𝐰𝐞𝐚𝐩𝐨𝐧𝐬, 𝐛𝐲 𝐬𝐮𝐫𝐫𝐞𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐧𝐠, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐛𝐲 𝐫𝐞𝐥𝐞𝐚𝐬𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐡𝐨𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐠𝐞𝐬. None of the suffering - none of the suffering - would have happened if Hamas hadn't done what it did on... show more

Israel ישראל

1,883,233 subscribers

1,430,734 görüntüleme • 2 yıl önce •via X (Twitter)

Sağlık & İyilik Haberler & Politika Bilim & Teknoloji

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

10 Yorum

Duopoly Destroyer profil fotoğrafı

Duopoly Destroyer2 yıl önce

@SecBlinken Israel could’ve ended this October 6th by releasing the Palestinian political prisoners, ending the apartheid occupation, and choosing not to hide behind civilians.

Prophetamus profil fotoğrafı

Prophetamus2 yıl önce

@SecBlinken I can't help but think whether this guy is American or Israeli.. then I think it doesn't matter.. he's simply a zionist.

Susanne*Roellchen profil fotoğrafı

Susanne*Roellchen2 yıl önce

@SecBlinken It didn't even have to come to that particular day, right Israel ? ⤵️

Furkan Gözükara profil fotoğrafı

Furkan Gözükara2 yıl önce

@SecBlinken British Foreign Secretary David Cameron was recently discovered acknowledging that Israel is committing war crimes in Gaza. This is a must-see! 👇

Susanne*Roellchen profil fotoğrafı

Susanne*Roellchen2 yıl önce

@SecBlinken You, ISrael, know exactly what injustice you have been committing for decades ! ⤵️

TheContractor profil fotoğrafı

TheContractor2 yıl önce

@SecBlinken Ok buddy.

Rabia jan profil fotoğrafı

Rabia jan2 yıl önce

@SecBlinken Standing with🇵🇸🇵🇸🇵🇸

Freedom Observer profil fotoğrafı

Freedom Observer2 yıl önce

From January to October 6, 2023, there were significant casualties among Palestinians in the conflict. According to Al Jazeera, in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, at least 483 Palestinians, including 63 children, were killed by Israeli forces or armed settlers. This statistic reflects events up until that point in the year. Moreover, a report from Doctors Without Borders stated that over 450 Palestinians, including at least 106 children, were killed in the West Bank during 2023. This made it the deadliest year in the region since the organization started recording casualties in 2005.

Going Underground profil fotoğrafı

Going Underground2 yıl önce

@SecBlinken

Pepe Mask 🐸🦉🇺🇸 profil fotoğrafı

Pepe Mask 🐸🦉🇺🇸2 yıl önce

@SecBlinken Same Face same Goal ! #IsraelNewNazism

Benzer Videolar

Sophie’s view on what happened last game: “During real time last night, I did not see that happen. None of our team saw that happen. Because I promise you, if we would have seen that happen, we would have had her back. Unfortunately, this type of shit happens every single game to her, and the league and the refs do absolutely nothing about it… the kneeing and cheap shotting C in the throat? If they did that to any of our teammates, we’d be pissed. But they’re definitely targeting her, and the league and the refs do nothing to protect her.”

Sophie’s view on what happened last game: “During real time last night, I did not see that happen. None of our team saw that happen. Because I promise you, if we would have seen that happen, we would have had her back. Unfortunately, this type of shit happens every single game to her, and the league and the refs do absolutely nothing about it… the kneeing and cheap shotting C in the throat? If they did that to any of our teammates, we’d be pissed. But they’re definitely targeting her, and the league and the refs do nothing to protect her.”

Jess

144,812 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

One of the first things Ranil Wickremesinghe did in July 2022 was thank the police and tri forces for protecting Parliament. Now three years later, seeing Nepal’s Parliament and Supreme Court set on fire, a woman burned alive, and so much death and destruction, it is hard not to think about what might have happened to Sri Lanka if RW had not stepped in back then. How many more would have dropped dead while standing in queues? How many would have been burned alive, beaten to death and dragged through the streets? What would have become of our economy? Sometimes you only see the value of a person and their decisions when you look at what happened elsewhere and realise it could have happened to you as well, if not for the timely and necessary decisions made while fearlessly risking their own life and home. Video credit: Newswire

One of the first things Ranil Wickremesinghe did in July 2022 was thank the police and tri forces for protecting Parliament. Now three years later, seeing Nepal’s Parliament and Supreme Court set on fire, a woman burned alive, and so much death and destruction, it is hard not to think about what might have happened to Sri Lanka if RW had not stepped in back then. How many more would have dropped dead while standing in queues? How many would have been burned alive, beaten to death and dragged through the streets? What would have become of our economy? Sometimes you only see the value of a person and their decisions when you look at what happened elsewhere and realise it could have happened to you as well, if not for the timely and necessary decisions made while fearlessly risking their own life and home. Video credit: Newswire

Kulanthi Silva

34,893 görüntüleme • 11 ay önce

So Blake Lively sent her 17 demands to return to work on Nov 9, 2023. She claimed it was for a safe environment for everyone. In reality, it was filled with things that gave her power over nearly every aspect of production. Not only that but she would claim retaliation if anyone did anything she deemed negative, like a change in tone or attitude. I kid you not. Justin Baldoni responded on Nov 15th that they didn’t want to sign because none of the negative things she claimed ever happened and they would be losing control of the film. Blake shot back that it was non negotiable and if they didn’t sign it she wouldn’t finish the movie and would file a lawsuit . So they were forced to agree. She tested out if her strategy to take over the movie would work and it did. This is what Blake, who was sexually harassed, afraid, feeling unsafe, and suffering mental anguish, posted on Nov. 21,2023. Mission complete.

So Blake Lively sent her 17 demands to return to work on Nov 9, 2023. She claimed it was for a safe environment for everyone. In reality, it was filled with things that gave her power over nearly every aspect of production. Not only that but she would claim retaliation if anyone did anything she deemed negative, like a change in tone or attitude. I kid you not. Justin Baldoni responded on Nov 15th that they didn’t want to sign because none of the negative things she claimed ever happened and they would be losing control of the film. Blake shot back that it was non negotiable and if they didn’t sign it she wouldn’t finish the movie and would file a lawsuit . So they were forced to agree. She tested out if her strategy to take over the movie would work and it did. This is what Blake, who was sexually harassed, afraid, feeling unsafe, and suffering mental anguish, posted on Nov. 21,2023. Mission complete.

Melanie King

378,381 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

A software company had 10 people in operations. None of them made strategic decisions. All of them followed processes that hadn't changed in six month. One person looked at that and didn't think about hiring number eleven. He thought about what would happen if the processes ran themselves. 40 hours later he had 7 workflows. Claude reads the lead form, scores it, writes a reply that sounds human, and logs everything to the CRM before the sales team finishes their coffee. Another workflow pulls data from five platforms every Sunday night and delivers a report at 8am Monday. The team reads it. Nobody wrote it. But here's what's different from every other automation story. His agents share a memory system. A visual graph where every piece of context connects to every other piece. You can scroll through it and watch the web of knowledge grow in real time. The bots don't start fresh every run. They build on what they already know. Everyone else is building automations that forget. He built ones that remember. Different infrastructure. Different outcome.

A software company had 10 people in operations. None of them made strategic decisions. All of them followed processes that hadn't changed in six month. One person looked at that and didn't think about hiring number eleven. He thought about what would happen if the processes ran themselves. 40 hours later he had 7 workflows. Claude reads the lead form, scores it, writes a reply that sounds human, and logs everything to the CRM before the sales team finishes their coffee. Another workflow pulls data from five platforms every Sunday night and delivers a report at 8am Monday. The team reads it. Nobody wrote it. But here's what's different from every other automation story. His agents share a memory system. A visual graph where every piece of context connects to every other piece. You can scroll through it and watch the web of knowledge grow in real time. The bots don't start fresh every run. They build on what they already know. Everyone else is building automations that forget. He built ones that remember. Different infrastructure. Different outcome.

Superior

15,602 görüntüleme • 25 gün önce

Jamal has called Israel “cancer” and lied about what Hamas did on October 7 as it was happening. He referred to Shiri Bibas and her two children, Ariel and Kfir, as “settlers” and that there was no evidence of harm done to children on October 7. If I had called Palestine “cancer” and celebrated Jewish terror attacks against Palestinian civilians my career would have ended in an hour. But people like Jamas and Anas can do just that, and get away with it. Mainly because the world has gone into a mass psychosis after October 7.

Jamal has called Israel “cancer” and lied about what Hamas did on October 7 as it was happening. He referred to Shiri Bibas and her two children, Ariel and Kfir, as “settlers” and that there was no evidence of harm done to children on October 7. If I had called Palestine “cancer” and celebrated Jewish terror attacks against Palestinian civilians my career would have ended in an hour. But people like Jamas and Anas can do just that, and get away with it. Mainly because the world has gone into a mass psychosis after October 7.

Jotam Confino

38,351 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

Warren Buffett on the single best thing an investor could have done in 1942: At a recent shareholder meeting, Buffett explains that he normally goes straight into questions and answers. But this time he opened differently, because he felt the usual format was teaching the wrong lesson. As he puts it, "all the questions would naturally tend toward current events." So he went back to 1942, the year he bought his first stock, to make a point about everything that has happened since. "We've had 14 presidents, seven Republicans, seven Democrats. We've had world wars. We had 911. We had the Cuban missile crisis. We have all kinds of things." His lesson? None of it should have changed what you did with your money. "The best single thing you could have done on March 11th, 1942 when I bought my first stock was just buy an index fund and never look at a headline, never think about stocks anymore. Just like you would do if you bought a farm. You just buy the farm and let the tenant farmer run it for you." Then he gives the number. Buffett describes putting $10,000 into an index fund that reinvested dividends, and he pauses to let the audience guess what it would be worth. The answer: "it would come to $51 million now." The only belief required back then was simple: "The only thing you had to really believe in then is that America would win the war and that America would progress as it has ever since 1776. And that American business, if America moved forward, American business would move forward." Notice what he says you did NOT need: "You didn't have to worry about what stock to buy. You didn't have to worry what day to get in and out. You didn't know the Federal Reserve would exist."

Warren Buffett on the single best thing an investor could have done in 1942: At a recent shareholder meeting, Buffett explains that he normally goes straight into questions and answers. But this time he opened differently, because he felt the usual format was teaching the wrong lesson. As he puts it, "all the questions would naturally tend toward current events." So he went back to 1942, the year he bought his first stock, to make a point about everything that has happened since. "We've had 14 presidents, seven Republicans, seven Democrats. We've had world wars. We had 911. We had the Cuban missile crisis. We have all kinds of things." His lesson? None of it should have changed what you did with your money. "The best single thing you could have done on March 11th, 1942 when I bought my first stock was just buy an index fund and never look at a headline, never think about stocks anymore. Just like you would do if you bought a farm. You just buy the farm and let the tenant farmer run it for you." Then he gives the number. Buffett describes putting $10,000 into an index fund that reinvested dividends, and he pauses to let the audience guess what it would be worth. The answer: "it would come to $51 million now." The only belief required back then was simple: "The only thing you had to really believe in then is that America would win the war and that America would progress as it has ever since 1776. And that American business, if America moved forward, American business would move forward." Notice what he says you did NOT need: "You didn't have to worry about what stock to buy. You didn't have to worry what day to get in and out. You didn't know the Federal Reserve would exist."

Black Edge

16,436 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce

American nurse says the nursing industry is waking up to our healthcare system being all about profit “Nurses are speaking up because we can finally see the truth: this isn’t healthcare. It’s sick care. A business model built on keeping Americans sick, scared, and dependent.” “Our healthcare system is collapsing in plain sight and the people inside it have been silenced — We’ve tried to fight this at the state level. We’ve tried through unions. We’ve tried behind closed doors. Every time we were shut down” “I never thought I would be making a video like this, but America, we need your help. We are nurses, we're awake, and we see the corruption that's happening in the healthcare system every single day. We're finally seeing what decades of profit-first business decisions have done to our communities. Our nation is sick, our nation is lost, and none of that happened by accident. It was engineered by the system to profit off of all of us suffering.”

American nurse says the nursing industry is waking up to our healthcare system being all about profit “Nurses are speaking up because we can finally see the truth: this isn’t healthcare. It’s sick care. A business model built on keeping Americans sick, scared, and dependent.” “Our healthcare system is collapsing in plain sight and the people inside it have been silenced — We’ve tried to fight this at the state level. We’ve tried through unions. We’ve tried behind closed doors. Every time we were shut down” “I never thought I would be making a video like this, but America, we need your help. We are nurses, we're awake, and we see the corruption that's happening in the healthcare system every single day. We're finally seeing what decades of profit-first business decisions have done to our communities. Our nation is sick, our nation is lost, and none of that happened by accident. It was engineered by the system to profit off of all of us suffering.”

Wall Street Apes

321,899 görüntüleme • 9 ay önce

If someone had asked me before October 7th what I wanted to be remembered for, I would have said that I wanted people to know that I was a good father, husband, and friend; a fair judge; and a model American citizen. But October 7th was a watershed moment in the history of Western civilization—not because of what happened thousands of miles away, but because of what happened here in our supposedly sacred institutions. Hamas killed 1,200 innocent people. They butchered them in their bedrooms. They beheaded them at their dance parties. They blew them up clutching their families in their bomb shelters. And yet, at my alma maters, in our universities, we Jews became the oppressors. Hamas raped dozens and dozens of Jewish women and girls, mothers together with their daughters. That's now clear beyond peradventure. You can go home tonight and watch the videotaped confessions of Hamas terrorists admitting to these unspeakable acts. They committed the crime of kinocide. This was just announced in a recent report by an international NGO on May 12th of this year. It is the first documented use of kinocide as a weapon of war anywhere on the planet since Rwanda in the 1990s. And yet, in our Western media outlets, we Jews became the aggressors.

If someone had asked me before October 7th what I wanted to be remembered for, I would have said that I wanted people to know that I was a good father, husband, and friend; a fair judge; and a model American citizen. But October 7th was a watershed moment in the history of Western civilization—not because of what happened thousands of miles away, but because of what happened here in our supposedly sacred institutions. Hamas killed 1,200 innocent people. They butchered them in their bedrooms. They beheaded them at their dance parties. They blew them up clutching their families in their bomb shelters. And yet, at my alma maters, in our universities, we Jews became the oppressors. Hamas raped dozens and dozens of Jewish women and girls, mothers together with their daughters. That's now clear beyond peradventure. You can go home tonight and watch the videotaped confessions of Hamas terrorists admitting to these unspeakable acts. They committed the crime of kinocide. This was just announced in a recent report by an international NGO on May 12th of this year. It is the first documented use of kinocide as a weapon of war anywhere on the planet since Rwanda in the 1990s. And yet, in our Western media outlets, we Jews became the aggressors.

Roy K. Altman

252,305 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

🧵Secretary of State Blinken implies Israel is increasingly becoming “indistinguishable from” Hamas in losing a “reverence for human life”: “And I made clear then the commitment of the United States to Israel's security and to ensuring that Oct. 7 could never happen again. I also underscored Israel's moral, strategic, and legal requirements to protect civilians and provide humanitarian assistance to those who needed it. Now, of course what happened after Oct. 7 could have ended immediately if Hamas had stopped hiding behind civilians, released the hostages, and put down its weapons. But Israel is not Hamas. Israel is a democracy. Hamas a terrorist organization. And democracies place the highest value on human life. Every human life. As has been said, whoever saves a life saves the entire world. That's our strength. It's what distinguishes us from terrorists like Hamas. If we lose that reverence for human life, we risk becoming indistinguishable from those we confront.”

🧵Secretary of State Blinken implies Israel is increasingly becoming “indistinguishable from” Hamas in losing a “reverence for human life”: “And I made clear then the commitment of the United States to Israel's security and to ensuring that Oct. 7 could never happen again. I also underscored Israel's moral, strategic, and legal requirements to protect civilians and provide humanitarian assistance to those who needed it. Now, of course what happened after Oct. 7 could have ended immediately if Hamas had stopped hiding behind civilians, released the hostages, and put down its weapons. But Israel is not Hamas. Israel is a democracy. Hamas a terrorist organization. And democracies place the highest value on human life. Every human life. As has been said, whoever saves a life saves the entire world. That's our strength. It's what distinguishes us from terrorists like Hamas. If we lose that reverence for human life, we risk becoming indistinguishable from those we confront.”

Curtis Houck

36,883 görüntüleme • 2 yıl önce

Have you ever met a terrorist? Or have you ever almost been killed by one? Your answer is probably NO. Meet Yadin Gellman. He was celebrating his 30th birthday the night of October 6th and on the morning of October 7th, he got called in to duty. He went to Kibbutz Be’iri and saved many lives while risking his own. What he saw and experienced that day is something none of us could ever imagine. He got his finger blown off, and got shot in his chest, arm, and shoulder by Hamas. He saw babies murdered in their homes, entire families burned alive, and many other terrible things that I can’t even say. Imagine if Yadin was your brother, boyfriend, son, cousin, friend. How would you feel? What would you do? It has been 9 months and the world is forgetting. We must NEVER forget. 🙏🏻🎗️

Have you ever met a terrorist? Or have you ever almost been killed by one? Your answer is probably NO. Meet Yadin Gellman. He was celebrating his 30th birthday the night of October 6th and on the morning of October 7th, he got called in to duty. He went to Kibbutz Be’iri and saved many lives while risking his own. What he saw and experienced that day is something none of us could ever imagine. He got his finger blown off, and got shot in his chest, arm, and shoulder by Hamas. He saw babies murdered in their homes, entire families burned alive, and many other terrible things that I can’t even say. Imagine if Yadin was your brother, boyfriend, son, cousin, friend. How would you feel? What would you do? It has been 9 months and the world is forgetting. We must NEVER forget. 🙏🏻🎗️

Montana Tucker

165,215 görüntüleme • 2 yıl önce

Scarlett Johansson revealed that the cast didn’t initially see the full potential of The Avengers, admitting they had no idea the film would become the massive success it did. “When we made the first The Avengers, none of us knew what the potential of The Avengers would be. Iron Man was massively successful. It built Marvel Studios. Iron Man 2 was also very successful. Then there was Thor, which felt like it came from a completely different universe because it had such a different tone. Captain America had its own identity too. When you put all the characters together, plus Hulk and Hawkeye, it honestly felt like a big mess. Even on set, it felt crazy because we all looked insane. We were like, ‘What are we doing?’ I don’t think the cast really knew if it was going to work. I’m sure Kevin Feige and Joss Whedon believed in it, but for the rest of us, it was basically blind faith in them. I remember the big scene in front of Grand Central, the famous 360-degree shot where all the Avengers are together. That was the moment when we all thought, ‘I think this is actually going to work.’ Watching the playback, it looked so powerful. But while we were filming it, a lot of it didn’t feel very cool.

Scarlett Johansson revealed that the cast didn’t initially see the full potential of The Avengers, admitting they had no idea the film would become the massive success it did. “When we made the first The Avengers, none of us knew what the potential of The Avengers would be. Iron Man was massively successful. It built Marvel Studios. Iron Man 2 was also very successful. Then there was Thor, which felt like it came from a completely different universe because it had such a different tone. Captain America had its own identity too. When you put all the characters together, plus Hulk and Hawkeye, it honestly felt like a big mess. Even on set, it felt crazy because we all looked insane. We were like, ‘What are we doing?’ I don’t think the cast really knew if it was going to work. I’m sure Kevin Feige and Joss Whedon believed in it, but for the rest of us, it was basically blind faith in them. I remember the big scene in front of Grand Central, the famous 360-degree shot where all the Avengers are together. That was the moment when we all thought, ‘I think this is actually going to work.’ Watching the playback, it looked so powerful. But while we were filming it, a lot of it didn’t feel very cool.

Ruzy.hl

340,964 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

Álvaro Arbeloa, new head coach of Fulham in the English Premier League, coaching his players… What is coaching for? Engagement - helping players engage Development - helping players learn & grow Competing - helping players perform under pressure “𝟏𝟎𝟎% - 𝐢𝐭’𝐬 𝐣𝐮𝐬𝐭 𝐨𝐧𝐞 𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐫 - 𝐟𝐨𝐜𝐮𝐬, 𝐟𝐨𝐜𝐮𝐬” A message of engagement. A call for attention because the currency of coaching is attention. Capture, captivate, and cultivate their attention… “𝐖𝐡𝐞𝐧 𝐡𝐞 𝐠𝐨 𝐭𝐨 𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐬 𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐦𝐢𝐝𝐟𝐢𝐞𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐬, 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐭𝐨 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐞 𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐞 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐫𝐞𝐜𝐞𝐢𝐯𝐞; 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐜𝐚𝐧 𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐧 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐥𝐨𝐨𝐤 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐫𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭 𝐬𝐢𝐝𝐞 - 𝐥𝐢𝐤𝐞 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐝𝐢𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐨𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐝𝐚𝐲” Directing attention onto an external cue (the movement of a teammate) followed by a tactical cue (turn and look)…backed with a moment of retrieval (“like you did the other day”)…confidence…you’ve done this before… “𝐘𝐨𝐮 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐫𝐮𝐧𝐧𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐭𝐢𝐦𝐞…𝐢𝐭’𝐬 𝐡𝐚𝐫𝐝, 𝐢𝐭’𝐬 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐞𝐚𝐬𝐲” The declaration of hard is useful…I’d love to hear reinforcement of a mental technique here…”This is where you need to use self-talk to keep your energy and effort up” - mental techniques influence physical effort… “𝐏𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐬, 𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐬, 𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐬 𝐓𝐨𝐦” Insistence is so often the most powerful tool in a coaches armoury. But can coaches insist that teammates insist. Relational development is so often the strongest mediator of success in coach-team relationships. “𝐈𝐟 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐫𝐞𝐜𝐞𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐛𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐛𝐞𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐝 𝐡𝐢𝐦…𝐢𝐟 𝐡𝐞’𝐬 𝐭𝐨𝐨 𝐝𝐞𝐞𝐩 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐚 𝐥𝐨𝐭 𝐨𝐟 𝐬𝐩𝐚𝐜𝐞…𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐜𝐚𝐧 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐞” You want a player to remember your instructions…then engage them in retrieval practice. Ask them questions about what you’ve just instructed them (if there’s time). Retrieve…Rehearse…Remember “𝐘𝐨𝐮’𝐫𝐞 𝐚𝐥𝐰𝐚𝐲𝐬 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐜𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐞, 𝐰𝐞 𝐧𝐞𝐞𝐝 𝐨𝐧𝐞 𝐩𝐥𝐚𝐲𝐞𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐞…𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐭𝐨 𝐝𝐨 𝐲𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐣𝐨𝐛….𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐲 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐜𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐞 𝐜𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐧𝐞𝐥” An important instruction…again, have them repeat this back and even get them to physically show you this. Get them to verbally repeat but also physically rehearse (no matter how artificial it feels). Embodying instructions is essential (if there’s time) “𝐖𝐞𝐥𝐥 𝐝𝐨𝐧𝐞 𝐛𝐨𝐲𝐬…𝐠𝐨𝐨𝐝 𝐣𝐨𝐛 𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐲𝐨𝐧𝐞” Get them in a huddle…get them discussing what was good. Point out to them what was good. Give them evidence to go home with…and get them to give themselves evidence. Reinforce these tomorrow as expectations. Note: none of the above is a judgement of Arbeloa…I’m using these tiny vignettes as an opportunity to reinforce some coaching ideas ************************************* If you like these ideas, you might like my new book, Compete, which is available on all good online retailers.

Álvaro Arbeloa, new head coach of Fulham in the English Premier League, coaching his players… What is coaching for? Engagement - helping players engage Development - helping players learn & grow Competing - helping players perform under pressure “𝟏𝟎𝟎% - 𝐢𝐭’𝐬 𝐣𝐮𝐬𝐭 𝐨𝐧𝐞 𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐫 - 𝐟𝐨𝐜𝐮𝐬, 𝐟𝐨𝐜𝐮𝐬” A message of engagement. A call for attention because the currency of coaching is attention. Capture, captivate, and cultivate their attention… “𝐖𝐡𝐞𝐧 𝐡𝐞 𝐠𝐨 𝐭𝐨 𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐬 𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐦𝐢𝐝𝐟𝐢𝐞𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐬, 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐭𝐨 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐞 𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐞 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐫𝐞𝐜𝐞𝐢𝐯𝐞; 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐜𝐚𝐧 𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐧 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐥𝐨𝐨𝐤 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐫𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭 𝐬𝐢𝐝𝐞 - 𝐥𝐢𝐤𝐞 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐝𝐢𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐨𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐝𝐚𝐲” Directing attention onto an external cue (the movement of a teammate) followed by a tactical cue (turn and look)…backed with a moment of retrieval (“like you did the other day”)…confidence…you’ve done this before… “𝐘𝐨𝐮 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐫𝐮𝐧𝐧𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐭𝐢𝐦𝐞…𝐢𝐭’𝐬 𝐡𝐚𝐫𝐝, 𝐢𝐭’𝐬 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐞𝐚𝐬𝐲” The declaration of hard is useful…I’d love to hear reinforcement of a mental technique here…”This is where you need to use self-talk to keep your energy and effort up” - mental techniques influence physical effort… “𝐏𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐬, 𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐬, 𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐬 𝐓𝐨𝐦” Insistence is so often the most powerful tool in a coaches armoury. But can coaches insist that teammates insist. Relational development is so often the strongest mediator of success in coach-team relationships. “𝐈𝐟 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐫𝐞𝐜𝐞𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐛𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐛𝐞𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐝 𝐡𝐢𝐦…𝐢𝐟 𝐡𝐞’𝐬 𝐭𝐨𝐨 𝐝𝐞𝐞𝐩 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐚 𝐥𝐨𝐭 𝐨𝐟 𝐬𝐩𝐚𝐜𝐞…𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐜𝐚𝐧 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐞” You want a player to remember your instructions…then engage them in retrieval practice. Ask them questions about what you’ve just instructed them (if there’s time). Retrieve…Rehearse…Remember “𝐘𝐨𝐮’𝐫𝐞 𝐚𝐥𝐰𝐚𝐲𝐬 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐜𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐞, 𝐰𝐞 𝐧𝐞𝐞𝐝 𝐨𝐧𝐞 𝐩𝐥𝐚𝐲𝐞𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐞…𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐭𝐨 𝐝𝐨 𝐲𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐣𝐨𝐛….𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐲 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐜𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐞 𝐜𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐧𝐞𝐥” An important instruction…again, have them repeat this back and even get them to physically show you this. Get them to verbally repeat but also physically rehearse (no matter how artificial it feels). Embodying instructions is essential (if there’s time) “𝐖𝐞𝐥𝐥 𝐝𝐨𝐧𝐞 𝐛𝐨𝐲𝐬…𝐠𝐨𝐨𝐝 𝐣𝐨𝐛 𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐲𝐨𝐧𝐞” Get them in a huddle…get them discussing what was good. Point out to them what was good. Give them evidence to go home with…and get them to give themselves evidence. Reinforce these tomorrow as expectations. Note: none of the above is a judgement of Arbeloa…I’m using these tiny vignettes as an opportunity to reinforce some coaching ideas ************************************* If you like these ideas, you might like my new book, Compete, which is available on all good online retailers.

Daniel Abrahams

1,003,235 görüntüleme • 26 gün önce

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

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

Joe Murgia

12,708 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

.Just the News’s Jerry Dunleavy IV 🇺🇸: “So, Pope Leo has made some comments about the war in Iran, and the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops recently put out a statement suggesting that the war does not fit the requirements of just war theory. And I wondered if the Pentagon had thought about this war against the terrorist regime in Iran in terms of the framework of a just war. And if either one of you could talk about that, and then just my — my second question would be the Pentagon recently, this week gave well-deserved award upgrades to the members of Gulf Company 21 Marines who served at HKAI and Abbey Gate during the withdrawal and evacuation. I wonder if you, Mr. Secretary, could speak a little bit about that and maybe give us a little bit more in terms of what to expect from this Afghanistan review in terms of further proper recognition and proper accountability?” Secretary of War Pete Hegseth Hegseth: “On the first question, Pope’s going to do his thing. That’s fine. We know what our mission is. We know what authority we have. We’re very clear about that. We follow that the orders of the president. We’ve got lawyers all over the place looking at what we’re doing and why we’re doing it, and giving us every authority necessary under the Constitution and under our laws to execute it. So, we feel very confident across the spectrum about what we’re doing and why we’re doing it, and the legal justification that we’re following in order to do it. You mentioned the Marines at Abbey Gate, and you know, what we’ve undertaken at this Department is a historic Afghanistan review. So, we have, over the course of months, reviewed what happened leading up to and including the events at Abbey Gate and the disastrous withdrawal in Afghanistan. There’s never actually been a full accounting in this Department of the decisions that were made. There’s been sort of papered over congressional attempts, but never a real deep dive where we brought everybody in to talk about what happened and why it happened. That has happened. That review will come later this summer, and I think you’ll find it to be probably the most comprehensive review this Department has ever done about a single series of events. And it’s because the — the cascading effect of what Joe Biden did in abandoning that mission, the way that he did and that disastrous withdrawal had ripple effects for our military, for our country, and for the world. That’s why reestablishing deterrence is one of the core pillars of what we’ve been doing at the War Department, because the world looked at that disaster and made choices. Vladimir Putin made choices, Hamas made choices and saw that America wouldn’t do anything about it. Houthis shot at ships. They made choices because Joe Biden and his administration were seen as feckless and weak, and that withdrawal was a part of what the world sawm people hanging to planes as we as we fled. That deserves a full accounting, which is exactly what we’re doing. Sean Parnell, our chief spokesman, one of my senior advisors, has been leading that effort, getting to the bottom of it. And one of the revelations was that those Marines at Abbey Gate who showed courage, who were out there exposed, knew there was a threat, nebulous mission. The only gate that’s open did not receive the kind of proper recognition they should have for their heroism. So, one of the early results of this Afghan review is to ensure they get the due recognition and award they deserve for the heroism and courage they showed at that gate. Despite the bad decisions of this building and that administration, those Marines acted heroically, and we’re going to recognize them for that. Jerry, thank you.”

.Just the News’s Jerry Dunleavy IV 🇺🇸: “So, Pope Leo has made some comments about the war in Iran, and the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops recently put out a statement suggesting that the war does not fit the requirements of just war theory. And I wondered if the Pentagon had thought about this war against the terrorist regime in Iran in terms of the framework of a just war. And if either one of you could talk about that, and then just my — my second question would be the Pentagon recently, this week gave well-deserved award upgrades to the members of Gulf Company 21 Marines who served at HKAI and Abbey Gate during the withdrawal and evacuation. I wonder if you, Mr. Secretary, could speak a little bit about that and maybe give us a little bit more in terms of what to expect from this Afghanistan review in terms of further proper recognition and proper accountability?” Secretary of War Pete Hegseth Hegseth: “On the first question, Pope’s going to do his thing. That’s fine. We know what our mission is. We know what authority we have. We’re very clear about that. We follow that the orders of the president. We’ve got lawyers all over the place looking at what we’re doing and why we’re doing it, and giving us every authority necessary under the Constitution and under our laws to execute it. So, we feel very confident across the spectrum about what we’re doing and why we’re doing it, and the legal justification that we’re following in order to do it. You mentioned the Marines at Abbey Gate, and you know, what we’ve undertaken at this Department is a historic Afghanistan review. So, we have, over the course of months, reviewed what happened leading up to and including the events at Abbey Gate and the disastrous withdrawal in Afghanistan. There’s never actually been a full accounting in this Department of the decisions that were made. There’s been sort of papered over congressional attempts, but never a real deep dive where we brought everybody in to talk about what happened and why it happened. That has happened. That review will come later this summer, and I think you’ll find it to be probably the most comprehensive review this Department has ever done about a single series of events. And it’s because the — the cascading effect of what Joe Biden did in abandoning that mission, the way that he did and that disastrous withdrawal had ripple effects for our military, for our country, and for the world. That’s why reestablishing deterrence is one of the core pillars of what we’ve been doing at the War Department, because the world looked at that disaster and made choices. Vladimir Putin made choices, Hamas made choices and saw that America wouldn’t do anything about it. Houthis shot at ships. They made choices because Joe Biden and his administration were seen as feckless and weak, and that withdrawal was a part of what the world sawm people hanging to planes as we as we fled. That deserves a full accounting, which is exactly what we’re doing. Sean Parnell, our chief spokesman, one of my senior advisors, has been leading that effort, getting to the bottom of it. And one of the revelations was that those Marines at Abbey Gate who showed courage, who were out there exposed, knew there was a threat, nebulous mission. The only gate that’s open did not receive the kind of proper recognition they should have for their heroism. So, one of the early results of this Afghan review is to ensure they get the due recognition and award they deserve for the heroism and courage they showed at that gate. Despite the bad decisions of this building and that administration, those Marines acted heroically, and we’re going to recognize them for that. Jerry, thank you.”

Curtis Houck

19,597 görüntüleme • 4 ay önce

Indyref 2014 was rigged, most of it happened in plain sight. Sara Salyers of Salvo.Scot explains how. "In a consultative referendum, an opinion poll, there's no contract, there's no actual requirement, which David Cameron did point out, to abide by the results of that referendum. "So they did not then set it up in the way that a proper constitutional referendum would have been set up according to international standards to begin with. "The people who would be voting in that referendum would be people who had a stake in the future of the nation whose future they were voting on. "We had every boy and his dog able to vote. So people who hadn't been in Scotland for, you know, more than maybe a few months, basically, all these people had a vote on the future of Scotland as an independent nation, which is, if you just think about it, think how absurd that is, people with no stake. "Now, had that been serious, you know, a real referendum, that we were going to be allowed to have a chance of winning, they would have applied international standards, they would have used something like the new Caledonia franchise, which is a really solid. "And it doesn't exclude people who've moved into Scotland. It isn't just ethnic Scots, it's, you know, it's people who have a genuine stake, interest in the future of that nation. That franchise, it shouldn't be a council... local council franchise, it should be one that reflects the stakeholders, who are the real stakeholders, and that's what that needs to be. That it wasn't, should have told us everything. "Then we had the Edinburgh Agreement, and the Edinburgh Agreement said that there was a Purdah period, during which no new policies were to be announced. There was no... you know, all the campaigning would go on and then it stops. You can rehearse the arguments and everything that's been put forward, but nothing new should be introduced. "Well, we got 'The Vow', 'Devo Max', less than two days before the vote. 'If you vote No, you will get this'. Of course, that did not deliver, but it completely breached the Edinburgh Agreement. "Well, what the sad afterwards was, 'Well, there's no evidence that it altered people's minds. Of course it did. Of course it told people, 'Well, if you don't want to go all the way to independence, we could have,' I think Gordon Brown said, 'it would be almost a federal relationship,' you know, blah, blah, blah. "And that that meant people could say, 'Well, if we're afraid of what will happen, afraid of being pulled out of the European Union, we'd like a lot more power, but we were not sure about a total break...'. Well, of course, then they voted No. "Then you also had the media. And in a properly run referendum, according to international rules, you make sure it's 50-50, that people get both sides of the argument, absolutely equally. "There was a full study done, and it took one guy, Glasgow University lecturer in particular, to go through everything and come back and say, 'Look, it was over 70%, 'No' media coverage', and that also breaches international standards. "So we didn't have any possibility of a fair referendum. And that wasn't coincidental. And had there been any kind of vote tampering, say, with the postal vote, because it was only consultative and there was no actual, therefore fraud, it makes it nearly impossible to get a judicial review. "And there is no way, no matter what they have said, no matter what they have told us, 'Get a majority of members elected to Westminster' and that 'You don't need a referendum', or if 'Scotland wants to leave, then it has the right to do so'. No matter what the British State has said, that was never true." Sara Salyers on the @untribalpol @TheScotCongress

Indyref 2014 was rigged, most of it happened in plain sight. Sara Salyers of Salvo.Scot explains how. "In a consultative referendum, an opinion poll, there's no contract, there's no actual requirement, which David Cameron did point out, to abide by the results of that referendum. "So they did not then set it up in the way that a proper constitutional referendum would have been set up according to international standards to begin with. "The people who would be voting in that referendum would be people who had a stake in the future of the nation whose future they were voting on. "We had every boy and his dog able to vote. So people who hadn't been in Scotland for, you know, more than maybe a few months, basically, all these people had a vote on the future of Scotland as an independent nation, which is, if you just think about it, think how absurd that is, people with no stake. "Now, had that been serious, you know, a real referendum, that we were going to be allowed to have a chance of winning, they would have applied international standards, they would have used something like the new Caledonia franchise, which is a really solid. "And it doesn't exclude people who've moved into Scotland. It isn't just ethnic Scots, it's, you know, it's people who have a genuine stake, interest in the future of that nation. That franchise, it shouldn't be a council... local council franchise, it should be one that reflects the stakeholders, who are the real stakeholders, and that's what that needs to be. That it wasn't, should have told us everything. "Then we had the Edinburgh Agreement, and the Edinburgh Agreement said that there was a Purdah period, during which no new policies were to be announced. There was no... you know, all the campaigning would go on and then it stops. You can rehearse the arguments and everything that's been put forward, but nothing new should be introduced. "Well, we got 'The Vow', 'Devo Max', less than two days before the vote. 'If you vote No, you will get this'. Of course, that did not deliver, but it completely breached the Edinburgh Agreement. "Well, what the sad afterwards was, 'Well, there's no evidence that it altered people's minds. Of course it did. Of course it told people, 'Well, if you don't want to go all the way to independence, we could have,' I think Gordon Brown said, 'it would be almost a federal relationship,' you know, blah, blah, blah. "And that that meant people could say, 'Well, if we're afraid of what will happen, afraid of being pulled out of the European Union, we'd like a lot more power, but we were not sure about a total break...'. Well, of course, then they voted No. "Then you also had the media. And in a properly run referendum, according to international rules, you make sure it's 50-50, that people get both sides of the argument, absolutely equally. "There was a full study done, and it took one guy, Glasgow University lecturer in particular, to go through everything and come back and say, 'Look, it was over 70%, 'No' media coverage', and that also breaches international standards. "So we didn't have any possibility of a fair referendum. And that wasn't coincidental. And had there been any kind of vote tampering, say, with the postal vote, because it was only consultative and there was no actual, therefore fraud, it makes it nearly impossible to get a judicial review. "And there is no way, no matter what they have said, no matter what they have told us, 'Get a majority of members elected to Westminster' and that 'You don't need a referendum', or if 'Scotland wants to leave, then it has the right to do so'. No matter what the British State has said, that was never true." Sara Salyers on the @untribalpol @TheScotCongress

ScotNews

21,718 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

𝐅𝐥𝐲 𝐄𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐨𝐩𝐢𝐚𝐧 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐞𝐱𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐩𝐨𝐞𝐭𝐫𝐲 𝐢𝐧 𝐦𝐨𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 Ethiopian Airlines “𝐄𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐨𝐩𝐢𝐚𝐧 𝐢𝐬 𝐨𝐧𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐨𝐬𝐞 𝐚𝐢𝐫𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐞𝐬 𝐰𝐡𝐞𝐧 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐬 𝐚𝐛𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐚𝐧𝐲 𝐨𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫, 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐰𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐚𝐥𝐰𝐚𝐲𝐬 𝐬𝐚𝐲, “𝐈 𝐰𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐭𝐚𝐤𝐞 𝐄𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐨𝐩𝐢𝐚𝐧.” Ethiopian Airlines still among the very best in the world! The tragically fateful day was March 10, 2019. Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302 was bound from Bole International Airport in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, to Jomo Kenyatta International Airport in Nairobi, Kenya. Minutes after takeoff, the Boeing 737 MAX 8 aircraft crashed near the town of Bishoftu less than 30 kilometers from Addis Ababa. All 149 passengers and 8 crew members on board died. 𝐅𝐥𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭 𝟑𝟎𝟐 𝐢𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐬𝐭 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐝𝐞𝐚𝐝𝐥𝐢𝐞𝐬𝐭 𝐚𝐜𝐜𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐢𝐧 𝐄𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐨𝐩𝐢𝐚𝐧 𝐀𝐢𝐫𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐞𝐬’ 𝟖𝟎-𝐲𝐞𝐚𝐫 𝐡𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐲. Boeing tried to blame the Ethiopian flight crew for the accident, but the US National Transportation Safety Board determined the Ethiopia flight crew did what they had to do by the Boeing book, but were still unable to control the plane. Ethiopian Airlines Captain Yared Getachew, with over 8,000 flight hours, was the youngest to serve as a Boeing 737 captain in the airline's history. Captain Yared and his co-pilot struggled as the 737 Max 8’s systems repeatedly forced the nose of the plane down. The reason for the crash was Boeing’s depraved and corrupt conduct resulting in the “deadliest corporate crime in U.S. history.” On June 18, 2024, a US federal judge ordered release of confidential documents from a civil case that could result in criminal prosecution of Boeing officials. There are those who try to sully and scandalize the name of Ethiopia Airlines. They should be careful as there are serious civil and criminal liabilities for slander and defamation under Ethiopian law. 𝐋𝐚𝐮𝐠𝐡𝐚𝐛𝐥𝐲, 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐞 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐨𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐬 𝐰𝐡𝐨 𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐨 𝐫𝐞𝐩𝐥𝐚𝐜𝐞 𝐬𝐞𝐫𝐯𝐢𝐜𝐞 𝐛𝐲 𝐄𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐨𝐩𝐢𝐚𝐧 𝐀𝐢𝐫𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐞𝐬 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐢𝐫 𝐟𝐞𝐞𝐭🐾 𝐆𝐨𝐨𝐝 𝐥𝐮𝐜𝐤 𝐭𝐨 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐦. 𝐋𝐢𝐤𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐨𝐥𝐝 𝐁𝐚𝐧𝐠𝐥𝐞𝐬 𝐬𝐨𝐧𝐠, 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐲 𝐜𝐚𝐧 “𝐰𝐚𝐥𝐤 𝐥𝐢𝐤𝐞 𝐚𝐧 𝐄𝐠𝐲𝐩𝐭𝐢𝐚𝐧.” The incontrovertible fact is that Ethiopian is the best airline in Africa, and among the very best in the world. 𝐄𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐨𝐩𝐢𝐚𝐧 𝐀𝐢𝐫𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐞𝐬 𝐩𝐢𝐥𝐨𝐭𝐬, 𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐬 𝐝𝐨𝐰𝐧, 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐛𝐞𝐬𝐭 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐥𝐝. 𝐖𝐡𝐞𝐧 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐟𝐥𝐲 𝐄𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐨𝐩𝐢𝐚𝐧, 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐝𝐨𝐧’𝐭 𝐟𝐞𝐞𝐥 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐩𝐥𝐚𝐧𝐞 𝐭𝐚𝐤𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐨𝐟𝐟, 𝐜𝐫𝐮𝐢𝐬𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐨𝐫 𝐥𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠. 𝐓𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐢𝐬 𝐰𝐡𝐲 𝐘𝐎𝐔 𝐬𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐥𝐝 𝐟𝐥𝐲 𝐄𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐨𝐩𝐢𝐚𝐧 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐞𝐱𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐩𝐨𝐞𝐭𝐫𝐲 𝐢𝐧 𝐦𝐨𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧. 💙🩶❤️ Ethiopian Airlines Office of the Prime Minister - Ethiopia Abiy Ahmed Ali 🇪🇹 Sahle-Work Zewde Tagesse Chaffo Dullo Adanech Abiebie The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ethiopia 🇪🇹 African Union U.S. Embassy Addis Office of the Prime Minister - Ethiopia Secretary Antony Blinken Department of State @PowerUSAID @USAIDEthiopia Chinese Embassy in Ethiopia Government of Russia EU in Ethiopia / የአውሮፓ ህብረት በኢትዮጵያ Russian Embassy in Ethiopia Mike Hammer #Ethiopia #AddisAbaba #IamMEGA UK in Ethiopia 🇬🇧 EU in Ethiopia / የአውሮፓ ህብረት በኢትዮጵያ Finland in Ethiopia & AU German Embassy Addis Ababa Denmark in Addis Czech Embassy Addis Ababa Belgium in Addis Ababa Austrian Embassy Addis Ababa Stian Christensen Irish Embassy Addis @NZinEthiopia Australian Embassy, Ethiopia Embajada de España en Etiopía NL Embassy Ethiopia Sweden in Ethiopia & AU

𝐅𝐥𝐲 𝐄𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐨𝐩𝐢𝐚𝐧 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐞𝐱𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐩𝐨𝐞𝐭𝐫𝐲 𝐢𝐧 𝐦𝐨𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 Ethiopian Airlines “𝐄𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐨𝐩𝐢𝐚𝐧 𝐢𝐬 𝐨𝐧𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐨𝐬𝐞 𝐚𝐢𝐫𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐞𝐬 𝐰𝐡𝐞𝐧 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐬 𝐚𝐛𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐚𝐧𝐲 𝐨𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫, 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐰𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐚𝐥𝐰𝐚𝐲𝐬 𝐬𝐚𝐲, “𝐈 𝐰𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐭𝐚𝐤𝐞 𝐄𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐨𝐩𝐢𝐚𝐧.” Ethiopian Airlines still among the very best in the world! The tragically fateful day was March 10, 2019. Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302 was bound from Bole International Airport in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, to Jomo Kenyatta International Airport in Nairobi, Kenya. Minutes after takeoff, the Boeing 737 MAX 8 aircraft crashed near the town of Bishoftu less than 30 kilometers from Addis Ababa. All 149 passengers and 8 crew members on board died. 𝐅𝐥𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭 𝟑𝟎𝟐 𝐢𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐬𝐭 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐝𝐞𝐚𝐝𝐥𝐢𝐞𝐬𝐭 𝐚𝐜𝐜𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐢𝐧 𝐄𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐨𝐩𝐢𝐚𝐧 𝐀𝐢𝐫𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐞𝐬’ 𝟖𝟎-𝐲𝐞𝐚𝐫 𝐡𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐲. Boeing tried to blame the Ethiopian flight crew for the accident, but the US National Transportation Safety Board determined the Ethiopia flight crew did what they had to do by the Boeing book, but were still unable to control the plane. Ethiopian Airlines Captain Yared Getachew, with over 8,000 flight hours, was the youngest to serve as a Boeing 737 captain in the airline's history. Captain Yared and his co-pilot struggled as the 737 Max 8’s systems repeatedly forced the nose of the plane down. The reason for the crash was Boeing’s depraved and corrupt conduct resulting in the “deadliest corporate crime in U.S. history.” On June 18, 2024, a US federal judge ordered release of confidential documents from a civil case that could result in criminal prosecution of Boeing officials. There are those who try to sully and scandalize the name of Ethiopia Airlines. They should be careful as there are serious civil and criminal liabilities for slander and defamation under Ethiopian law. 𝐋𝐚𝐮𝐠𝐡𝐚𝐛𝐥𝐲, 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐞 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐨𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐬 𝐰𝐡𝐨 𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐨 𝐫𝐞𝐩𝐥𝐚𝐜𝐞 𝐬𝐞𝐫𝐯𝐢𝐜𝐞 𝐛𝐲 𝐄𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐨𝐩𝐢𝐚𝐧 𝐀𝐢𝐫𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐞𝐬 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐢𝐫 𝐟𝐞𝐞𝐭🐾 𝐆𝐨𝐨𝐝 𝐥𝐮𝐜𝐤 𝐭𝐨 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐦. 𝐋𝐢𝐤𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐨𝐥𝐝 𝐁𝐚𝐧𝐠𝐥𝐞𝐬 𝐬𝐨𝐧𝐠, 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐲 𝐜𝐚𝐧 “𝐰𝐚𝐥𝐤 𝐥𝐢𝐤𝐞 𝐚𝐧 𝐄𝐠𝐲𝐩𝐭𝐢𝐚𝐧.” The incontrovertible fact is that Ethiopian is the best airline in Africa, and among the very best in the world. 𝐄𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐨𝐩𝐢𝐚𝐧 𝐀𝐢𝐫𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐞𝐬 𝐩𝐢𝐥𝐨𝐭𝐬, 𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐬 𝐝𝐨𝐰𝐧, 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐛𝐞𝐬𝐭 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐥𝐝. 𝐖𝐡𝐞𝐧 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐟𝐥𝐲 𝐄𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐨𝐩𝐢𝐚𝐧, 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐝𝐨𝐧’𝐭 𝐟𝐞𝐞𝐥 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐩𝐥𝐚𝐧𝐞 𝐭𝐚𝐤𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐨𝐟𝐟, 𝐜𝐫𝐮𝐢𝐬𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐨𝐫 𝐥𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠. 𝐓𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐢𝐬 𝐰𝐡𝐲 𝐘𝐎𝐔 𝐬𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐥𝐝 𝐟𝐥𝐲 𝐄𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐨𝐩𝐢𝐚𝐧 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐞𝐱𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐩𝐨𝐞𝐭𝐫𝐲 𝐢𝐧 𝐦𝐨𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧. 💙🩶❤️ Ethiopian Airlines Office of the Prime Minister - Ethiopia Abiy Ahmed Ali 🇪🇹 Sahle-Work Zewde Tagesse Chaffo Dullo Adanech Abiebie The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ethiopia 🇪🇹 African Union U.S. Embassy Addis Office of the Prime Minister - Ethiopia Secretary Antony Blinken Department of State @PowerUSAID @USAIDEthiopia Chinese Embassy in Ethiopia Government of Russia EU in Ethiopia / የአውሮፓ ህብረት በኢትዮጵያ Russian Embassy in Ethiopia Mike Hammer #Ethiopia #AddisAbaba #IamMEGA UK in Ethiopia 🇬🇧 EU in Ethiopia / የአውሮፓ ህብረት በኢትዮጵያ Finland in Ethiopia & AU German Embassy Addis Ababa Denmark in Addis Czech Embassy Addis Ababa Belgium in Addis Ababa Austrian Embassy Addis Ababa Stian Christensen Irish Embassy Addis @NZinEthiopia Australian Embassy, Ethiopia Embajada de España en Etiopía NL Embassy Ethiopia Sweden in Ethiopia & AU

Al Mariam

13,983 görüntüleme • 2 yıl önce

The Night Jesus Was Arrested: What Really Happened in Gethsemane That Changed Everything Did you know the night Jesus Christ was arrested, something happened in the darkness that many Christians have never truly understood? It wasn’t just a betrayal. It wasn’t just soldiers with swords. Something far deeper happened in a quiet place called the garden of Gethsemane, a moment that would change the destiny of the entire world. It was late at night. The city of Jerusalem had grown quiet after the Passover meal. The moon hung over the olive trees as Jesus Christ walked slowly into the garden with his disciples. But this night was different. The Bible says his soul was exceedingly sorrowful, even unto death. Matthew 26:38. Jesus knew what was about to happen — the betrayal, the suffering, the cross. So he walked deeper into the garden and fell to the ground to pray. And in the silence of that night, Jesus prayed one of the most powerful prayers ever spoken: “Father, if you are willing, take this cup from me — yet not my will, but yours be done.” Luke 22:42. The weight of the world was upon him. Luke tells us something astonishing: Being in agony, he prayed more earnestly and his sweat became like drops of blood falling to the ground. Luke 22:44.

The Night Jesus Was Arrested: What Really Happened in Gethsemane That Changed Everything Did you know the night Jesus Christ was arrested, something happened in the darkness that many Christians have never truly understood? It wasn’t just a betrayal. It wasn’t just soldiers with swords. Something far deeper happened in a quiet place called the garden of Gethsemane, a moment that would change the destiny of the entire world. It was late at night. The city of Jerusalem had grown quiet after the Passover meal. The moon hung over the olive trees as Jesus Christ walked slowly into the garden with his disciples. But this night was different. The Bible says his soul was exceedingly sorrowful, even unto death. Matthew 26:38. Jesus knew what was about to happen — the betrayal, the suffering, the cross. So he walked deeper into the garden and fell to the ground to pray. And in the silence of that night, Jesus prayed one of the most powerful prayers ever spoken: “Father, if you are willing, take this cup from me — yet not my will, but yours be done.” Luke 22:42. The weight of the world was upon him. Luke tells us something astonishing: Being in agony, he prayed more earnestly and his sweat became like drops of blood falling to the ground. Luke 22:44.

NancyH

45,625 görüntüleme • 4 ay önce

.Douglas Murray to Piers Morgan: “The thing that struck me, Piers, about seeing the 7th of October footage, was that even the Nazis were actually ashamed of what they did. SS battalions who spent their days shooting Jews in the back of the head and pushing them into trenches, had to get very, very drunk in the evening to forget what they had done. The Nazi high command had to famously sort of get around the problem of soldier morale because the soldiers knew this wasn’t exactly what their lives were meant to look like either. “I tell you one very big difference. If you look at the raw footage—and I really hope people don’t on a wider scale have to view what I viewed the other day—if they see it, they will see something that is at least as barbaric as what the Nazis did. “But here’s the difference: They did it with glee. They were deeply proud. You see people taking the head off a young Israeli man with a shovel and then calling their parents back in Gaza and telling them, father, father, … I’ve killed ten Jews in my hands, get mother on the phone, I want to tell her how great a job their son has done. “I’m not exaggerating this. It’s very, very interesting. People need to realize you had this situation with the Nazis where they were also a genocidal anti-Semitic organization. But they tried to cover their crimes up. “Hamas [is] actually proud of them, and they’ve said they will do them until the whole world is clear of Jews. “So I suggest we take that seriously, and I think Israel is taking it seriously. I hope they continue to take it seriously. But I think the world should take it seriously.”

.Douglas Murray to Piers Morgan: “The thing that struck me, Piers, about seeing the 7th of October footage, was that even the Nazis were actually ashamed of what they did. SS battalions who spent their days shooting Jews in the back of the head and pushing them into trenches, had to get very, very drunk in the evening to forget what they had done. The Nazi high command had to famously sort of get around the problem of soldier morale because the soldiers knew this wasn’t exactly what their lives were meant to look like either. “I tell you one very big difference. If you look at the raw footage—and I really hope people don’t on a wider scale have to view what I viewed the other day—if they see it, they will see something that is at least as barbaric as what the Nazis did. “But here’s the difference: They did it with glee. They were deeply proud. You see people taking the head off a young Israeli man with a shovel and then calling their parents back in Gaza and telling them, father, father, … I’ve killed ten Jews in my hands, get mother on the phone, I want to tell her how great a job their son has done. “I’m not exaggerating this. It’s very, very interesting. People need to realize you had this situation with the Nazis where they were also a genocidal anti-Semitic organization. But they tried to cover their crimes up. “Hamas [is] actually proud of them, and they’ve said they will do them until the whole world is clear of Jews. “So I suggest we take that seriously, and I think Israel is taking it seriously. I hope they continue to take it seriously. But I think the world should take it seriously.”

George Conway ⚖️🇺🇸

1,653,268 görüntüleme • 2 yıl önce

An interesting exchange between US Rep. Adam Smith and Secretary Hegseth: Rep. Adam Smith: On Ukraine, a year-plus ago, your advice, the president’s advice, was that Ukraine had no cards to play and should cut the best possible deal it could. Clearly, that was wrong. What did you miss? What did you miss about the conflict between Russia and Ukraine that made you think Ukraine wouldn’t be capable of doing what it has done over the last 14 months? Sec. Pete Hegseth: Joe Biden, with no accountability, gave hundreds of billions of dollars in weapons to Ukraine - Smith: You're not gonna answer the question? Hegseth: to an outcome that never would have happened if President Trump were president. You guys don’t talk about that. Ultimately, President Trump believes there should be a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine. Smith: But you didn’t expect Ukraine to be where it is right now. I’m asking you, just from a strategic standpoint: what did you miss? Hegseth: I think the Ukrainians have shown great courage, and I appreciate that Europe is now paying for the weapons that we provide. 📹: msnow

An interesting exchange between US Rep. Adam Smith and Secretary Hegseth: Rep. Adam Smith: On Ukraine, a year-plus ago, your advice, the president’s advice, was that Ukraine had no cards to play and should cut the best possible deal it could. Clearly, that was wrong. What did you miss? What did you miss about the conflict between Russia and Ukraine that made you think Ukraine wouldn’t be capable of doing what it has done over the last 14 months? Sec. Pete Hegseth: Joe Biden, with no accountability, gave hundreds of billions of dollars in weapons to Ukraine - Smith: You're not gonna answer the question? Hegseth: to an outcome that never would have happened if President Trump were president. You guys don’t talk about that. Ultimately, President Trump believes there should be a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine. Smith: But you didn’t expect Ukraine to be where it is right now. I’m asking you, just from a strategic standpoint: what did you miss? Hegseth: I think the Ukrainians have shown great courage, and I appreciate that Europe is now paying for the weapons that we provide. 📹: msnow

Anton Gerashchenko

52,321 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce

What did we learn this Friday? We realized the new photos have a huge impact, with the shattered sticky-backed Rode mic scattered all over the SUV. Pieces of debris look very off-putting to the naked eye (burnt-like adhesive), especially since they got rid of all of it… not in evidence… and still more hasn’t come out. During all these “remembered testimonies” that contradicted each other, none described what was in the SUV. It’s a lot. I hope anyone involved who knows more comes forward with more/all the details. There’s a lot going on here, and they are already making a movie about “Who is Charlie Kirk” before we’ve even had the trial. It’s scary. Baron is on point. If all these important higher-ranking people are questioning the narrative, then we don’t have everything and we should dig more. Charlie was worth the highest level of investigation into his ass@ssination. It feels unresolved, and there is no harm in looking at every scenario because that is what Charlie would have done for anyone else.

What did we learn this Friday? We realized the new photos have a huge impact, with the shattered sticky-backed Rode mic scattered all over the SUV. Pieces of debris look very off-putting to the naked eye (burnt-like adhesive), especially since they got rid of all of it… not in evidence… and still more hasn’t come out. During all these “remembered testimonies” that contradicted each other, none described what was in the SUV. It’s a lot. I hope anyone involved who knows more comes forward with more/all the details. There’s a lot going on here, and they are already making a movie about “Who is Charlie Kirk” before we’ve even had the trial. It’s scary. Baron is on point. If all these important higher-ranking people are questioning the narrative, then we don’t have everything and we should dig more. Charlie was worth the highest level of investigation into his ass@ssination. It feels unresolved, and there is no harm in looking at every scenario because that is what Charlie would have done for anyone else.

Ashley Pagels

36,324 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce