Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Beim Laden dieses Videos ist ein Problem aufgetreten. Dies könnte an einem vorübergehenden Netzwerkproblem liegen oder das Video ist möglicherweise nicht verfügbar.

Utter nonsense! What you pass off as factual reporting is nothing more than regime propaganda, and Trump knows it. Let me spell it out. 1) You claim Rwanda violated the accord because Uvira fell into M23 hands. That is flat-out false. The offensive on Uvira began after two straight... days of failed Kinshasa coalition offensives aimed at capturing Bukavu. Presidents Kagame and Tshisekedi flew to Washington even as fighting raged south of Bukavu, including the Burundian army’s bombardment of Kamanyola on Rwanda’s border. You deliberately strip away that context (Kinshasa’s ceasefire violations) and present the response as the original breach. That’s not journalism. That’s narrative laundering. 2) In your so-called “probing questions,” you obsessively demand Rwanda’s withdrawal, yet you have never once asked when the DRC will fulfill its written obligation to neutralize the FDLR. It’s right there in the accords: the DRC neutralizes the FDLR first; Rwanda lifts its defensive measures second. Black on white. You erase the first condition and endlessly hammer the second. That is willful distortion. Again, you have zero integrity. 3) Even when you interviewed Burundi’s president, you conveniently avoided the ongoing violence and siege against the Banyamulenge, carried out with the involvement of his own army. You’ve also never confronted his ally Tshisekedi about the Wazalendo militias he armed — militias that operate alongside Burundian and Congolese troops while terrorizing civilians and committing documented atrocities. Not once do you acknowledge that these groups, alongside the FDLR, are explicitly required to be neutralized under the Washington Accords. What kind of journalist claims to care about civilians while systematically ignoring their worst abusers? Hariana, you’re not a journalist. Trump figured that out. December 4, 2024, was the last time he let you ask a question. Remember this? 👇 You exposed yourself, and since then he’s iced you. Same story with that U.S. lawmaker who recently brushed you off. (see video below) This is what happens when people realize you’re manufacturing reality! Cc: Albert Rudatsimburwa 🇷🇼 , Bojana Coulibaly, Ph.D. African Sir. Uracyaryamye Rosette Uwase Robert Cyubahiro McKenna Andrew M. Mwenda Minister of Food and Drinks🇷🇼 Akech Andrewshow more

Isabelle Karake

1,887 subscribers

30,876 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten •via X (Twitter)

Nachrichten & Politik

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

Your body fat is a tank with a tap on it, and the tap narrows as the tank empties. - Plenty of fat: your body covers almost any deficit you ask it to - Getting leaner: it covers less each day - Properly lean: it covers very little, and the rest comes off the plate Which is why the first stone comes off while you barely notice, and the last one takes everything you have. So when you are lean, the shortfall has to arrive as food. And the industry hands you the wrong bag. Push the protein. Two hundred grams. Two fifty. Chicken breast on a kitchen scale. Past what you build with, protein is a fuel your liver has to strip the nitrogen off before you can use a calorie of it, and that machinery has a speed limit. So the extra hundred grams builds nothing and lifts nothing. Protein is what you build with. Fat and carbohydrate are what you lift with. Cut them both to make room for another shake and you have removed the thing that was moving the weight. Fat wins that choice. Twice the energy per gram. Leaves insulin alone, so the fat you are burning is not told to stay put every three hours. Keeps you full. And it is the same fuel your own stores are already releasing. Eat the fat. It is the one thing on the plate that matters more the leaner you get, and the first thing they told you to cut.

Your body fat is a tank with a tap on it, and the tap narrows as the tank empties. - Plenty of fat: your body covers almost any deficit you ask it to - Getting leaner: it covers less each day - Properly lean: it covers very little, and the rest comes off the plate Which is why the first stone comes off while you barely notice, and the last one takes everything you have. So when you are lean, the shortfall has to arrive as food. And the industry hands you the wrong bag. Push the protein. Two hundred grams. Two fifty. Chicken breast on a kitchen scale. Past what you build with, protein is a fuel your liver has to strip the nitrogen off before you can use a calorie of it, and that machinery has a speed limit. So the extra hundred grams builds nothing and lifts nothing. Protein is what you build with. Fat and carbohydrate are what you lift with. Cut them both to make room for another shake and you have removed the thing that was moving the weight. Fat wins that choice. Twice the energy per gram. Leaves insulin alone, so the fat you are burning is not told to stay put every three hours. Keeps you full. And it is the same fuel your own stores are already releasing. Eat the fat. It is the one thing on the plate that matters more the leaner you get, and the first thing they told you to cut.

Sama Hoole

23,427 Aufrufe • vor 12 Tagen

I remember you well: You may not remember me, but I remember you very clearly. That very day when you surrounded our car with Kalashnikovs. You forced us out of the vehicle, searched our bodies under the pretext of “security,” and humiliated us. You were looking inside the car for “threats to security”; security that, apparently, was hidden in the phones of a few ordinary citizens, while the smallest details of your own information were never hidden from foreign intelligence services. I asked you: Why? You were drunk on power, backed by military-grade bullets. Your only reply was one sentence: “Shut up.” When you found nothing in the car or our phones, you furiously slammed the car body, not to search it, but to frighten us even more, us, your own fellow citizens. Now I see the drone attack footage on your checkpoint. And before anyone says “karma,” let me be very clear: This is not the karma of your actions. It is simply the consequence of the same violence, the same humiliation of people, and the same illusion of power that you have lived with for years. And now, for me, you are no longer compatriots, nor do I have even a moment of mourning left for you. 🎥 A video of attacks on the forces of the Islamic Republic regime #IranWar2026 #IranRevolution2026

I remember you well: You may not remember me, but I remember you very clearly. That very day when you surrounded our car with Kalashnikovs. You forced us out of the vehicle, searched our bodies under the pretext of “security,” and humiliated us. You were looking inside the car for “threats to security”; security that, apparently, was hidden in the phones of a few ordinary citizens, while the smallest details of your own information were never hidden from foreign intelligence services. I asked you: Why? You were drunk on power, backed by military-grade bullets. Your only reply was one sentence: “Shut up.” When you found nothing in the car or our phones, you furiously slammed the car body, not to search it, but to frighten us even more, us, your own fellow citizens. Now I see the drone attack footage on your checkpoint. And before anyone says “karma,” let me be very clear: This is not the karma of your actions. It is simply the consequence of the same violence, the same humiliation of people, and the same illusion of power that you have lived with for years. And now, for me, you are no longer compatriots, nor do I have even a moment of mourning left for you. 🎥 A video of attacks on the forces of the Islamic Republic regime #IranWar2026 #IranRevolution2026

پری‌سا

39,991 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

Dawah is deception. Why are you leaving out the context SeerahPro ? You know right after this he says he doesn’t remember well what he wrote in that entry on Muhaymin. Why leave that part out? He even goes on to say that section seems to be non-committal and he needs to go back and re-read it. So since you don’t want to show every one the full context, I’ll do it, and expose how you are lying now and lied in the debate. Sinai doesn’t help your claim that the Quran believes the previous scriptures were textually corrupted. He says he doesn’t think the Quran believes the previous scriptures were corrupted in the deep past and that they are unrecoverable (Clip 1). Now let’s look at the short clip you pulled in context (Clip 2). First, what he says does not affirm why you cited him to begin with, which is that the Quran is supposed to be a supreme authority and determine which parts of our scriptures are corrupt and which are not. In the very clip you pulled he says, “The Quran is claiming to be able to sort of determine the correct reading of these previous scriptures and to remedy misreading and misunderstandings.” So by arbiter he means it is not determining what parts of our scriptures are true or corrupted, it is only an arbiter in determining meaning. You just buried yourself by citing this, because you implied Sinai was saying the Quran is an arbiter for determining textual corruption, which he doesn’t say. It’s like you didn’t even pay attention to what you pulled. That is embarrassing. Second, right after this (in what you left out) the interviewer reminds him he entertained two possibilities in his book and was noncommittal. Sinai says he doesn’t remember what he said and was probably leaving open possibilities, which is what I already had to correct you on. If you go back to the book, once again, he said on page 707 essentially what I said, “Muhaymin, meanwhile, is derived from Syriac mhaymnā (or conceivably from its equivalent in some other form of Aramaic), a passive participle of the verb haymen and meaning ‘trustworthy, faithful, loyal.’” After this all he does in the book is mention other possibilities and the one you want is more contingent on non-canonical readings. But even if that interpretation is correct (which Sinai confirms in this interview is his view) it doesn’t help you, because you misunderstood what Sinai means by ‘arbiter.’ In Clip 3 he first says, “So I need to reread that entry. I guess it seems to be very non-committal.” But remember you said (Clip 4), “In his 'Key Terms of the Quran' he explicitly says that Muhaymin means the Quran is the arbiter of the contents.” That is incorrect. He did not explicitly say that. Why did you lie? In Clip 3 he goes on to say “But I think entrusted with authority can mean, authorized to sort of authoritatively interpret and determine especially theological significance.” So you don’t even understand what Sinai means by “arbiter.” He doesn’t mean what you mean, that the Quran is determining which parts of our scriptures are true and corrupted, but that it is an arbiter of meaning. The fact that you still do not see this means you are beyond delusional. You never should have cited Sinai because he doesn’t help you at all. The funny thing is we were already planning to go live tomorrow to review this interview because he doesn’t help you at all and unintentionally helps with the Islamic Dilemma.

Dawah is deception. Why are you leaving out the context SeerahPro ? You know right after this he says he doesn’t remember well what he wrote in that entry on Muhaymin. Why leave that part out? He even goes on to say that section seems to be non-committal and he needs to go back and re-read it. So since you don’t want to show every one the full context, I’ll do it, and expose how you are lying now and lied in the debate. Sinai doesn’t help your claim that the Quran believes the previous scriptures were textually corrupted. He says he doesn’t think the Quran believes the previous scriptures were corrupted in the deep past and that they are unrecoverable (Clip 1). Now let’s look at the short clip you pulled in context (Clip 2). First, what he says does not affirm why you cited him to begin with, which is that the Quran is supposed to be a supreme authority and determine which parts of our scriptures are corrupt and which are not. In the very clip you pulled he says, “The Quran is claiming to be able to sort of determine the correct reading of these previous scriptures and to remedy misreading and misunderstandings.” So by arbiter he means it is not determining what parts of our scriptures are true or corrupted, it is only an arbiter in determining meaning. You just buried yourself by citing this, because you implied Sinai was saying the Quran is an arbiter for determining textual corruption, which he doesn’t say. It’s like you didn’t even pay attention to what you pulled. That is embarrassing. Second, right after this (in what you left out) the interviewer reminds him he entertained two possibilities in his book and was noncommittal. Sinai says he doesn’t remember what he said and was probably leaving open possibilities, which is what I already had to correct you on. If you go back to the book, once again, he said on page 707 essentially what I said, “Muhaymin, meanwhile, is derived from Syriac mhaymnā (or conceivably from its equivalent in some other form of Aramaic), a passive participle of the verb haymen and meaning ‘trustworthy, faithful, loyal.’” After this all he does in the book is mention other possibilities and the one you want is more contingent on non-canonical readings. But even if that interpretation is correct (which Sinai confirms in this interview is his view) it doesn’t help you, because you misunderstood what Sinai means by ‘arbiter.’ In Clip 3 he first says, “So I need to reread that entry. I guess it seems to be very non-committal.” But remember you said (Clip 4), “In his 'Key Terms of the Quran' he explicitly says that Muhaymin means the Quran is the arbiter of the contents.” That is incorrect. He did not explicitly say that. Why did you lie? In Clip 3 he goes on to say “But I think entrusted with authority can mean, authorized to sort of authoritatively interpret and determine especially theological significance.” So you don’t even understand what Sinai means by “arbiter.” He doesn’t mean what you mean, that the Quran is determining which parts of our scriptures are true and corrupted, but that it is an arbiter of meaning. The fact that you still do not see this means you are beyond delusional. You never should have cited Sinai because he doesn’t help you at all. The funny thing is we were already planning to go live tomorrow to review this interview because he doesn’t help you at all and unintentionally helps with the Islamic Dilemma.

InspiringPhilosophy - Michael Jones

36,857 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

ICE agents: you’re being played. That “$50,000 bonus” you were sold? It’s not a bonus. It’s a leash. It’s paid out in pieces over five years—and the fine print is the punchline: if you quit or don’t hit crazy performance targets, you don’t just lose what’s left… you are forced to pay it back. That’s not an incentive. That’s a trap. And here’s what you can’t pay back or outrun: your family, your friends, and your neighbors will remember what you did. The fear. The humiliation. The harm you inflicted. You’re being asked to do things that will follow you long after the politicians move on to the next lie. So hear this plainly: walk away now. Don’t trade your conscience for money you’ll never see. Don’t let a “bonus” turn into a debt—and don’t let this become the story you spend the rest of your life trying to justify to the people who know you best. If you still have a choice, make it. Choose decency. Choose law. Choose people. Help fight the ones that don’t quite:

ICE agents: you’re being played. That “$50,000 bonus” you were sold? It’s not a bonus. It’s a leash. It’s paid out in pieces over five years—and the fine print is the punchline: if you quit or don’t hit crazy performance targets, you don’t just lose what’s left… you are forced to pay it back. That’s not an incentive. That’s a trap. And here’s what you can’t pay back or outrun: your family, your friends, and your neighbors will remember what you did. The fear. The humiliation. The harm you inflicted. You’re being asked to do things that will follow you long after the politicians move on to the next lie. So hear this plainly: walk away now. Don’t trade your conscience for money you’ll never see. Don’t let a “bonus” turn into a debt—and don’t let this become the story you spend the rest of your life trying to justify to the people who know you best. If you still have a choice, make it. Choose decency. Choose law. Choose people. Help fight the ones that don’t quite:

Joe Walsh

203,164 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten

This is called the sonder effect. It’s the realization that every stranger you see has an inner life as rich, layered, and emotionally real as your own. The person walking past you is not just “a woman in a red coat” or “some guy in traffic.” He has a past, private fears, people he misses, routines he hates, memories that still sting, and plans he has not told anyone yet. Most of the time, our brains simplify other people into background. Not because we are cruel, but because we have to move through the world from inside our own point of view. Sonder is what happens when that illusion breaks for a second. You stop seeing people as scenery and start seeing them as entire worlds. That is what makes it powerful. It does not just make the world feel bigger. It makes you more humble, more patient, and a little more aware of how much you do not know about the people around you. For one second, the background characters disappear. And everyone becomes real.

This is called the sonder effect. It’s the realization that every stranger you see has an inner life as rich, layered, and emotionally real as your own. The person walking past you is not just “a woman in a red coat” or “some guy in traffic.” He has a past, private fears, people he misses, routines he hates, memories that still sting, and plans he has not told anyone yet. Most of the time, our brains simplify other people into background. Not because we are cruel, but because we have to move through the world from inside our own point of view. Sonder is what happens when that illusion breaks for a second. You stop seeing people as scenery and start seeing them as entire worlds. That is what makes it powerful. It does not just make the world feel bigger. It makes you more humble, more patient, and a little more aware of how much you do not know about the people around you. For one second, the background characters disappear. And everyone becomes real.

Sovey

12,469 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

Dad’s home! 🏠 Because it’s one of the most frequent questions I receive, here’s your periodic reminder that your baby doesn’t forget you when you go to work. There’s a developmental milestone known as object permanence and sometimes parents overthink it. In a nutshell it’s the understanding that things continue to exist even when they’re out of sight - and it typically develops somewhere between 6-9 months. Does that mean you cease to exist (to your baby) when you go to work or the grocery store? It can be kind of a scary thought to new parents. The answer, even before the development of object permanence, is no. But it may mean that (even for your toddler) you’re misattributing adult forms of memory to your little one. Infants and toddlers both live very much in the moment and are still developing the type of robust narrative memory we possess as adults. So while you’re gone, it’s not that you cease to exist. It’s more a case of “out of sight, out of mind.” Will they recognize you when you return? Will they be excited to see you? I’ll let this beautiful video from beingritty on IG show you the answer.

Dad’s home! 🏠 Because it’s one of the most frequent questions I receive, here’s your periodic reminder that your baby doesn’t forget you when you go to work. There’s a developmental milestone known as object permanence and sometimes parents overthink it. In a nutshell it’s the understanding that things continue to exist even when they’re out of sight - and it typically develops somewhere between 6-9 months. Does that mean you cease to exist (to your baby) when you go to work or the grocery store? It can be kind of a scary thought to new parents. The answer, even before the development of object permanence, is no. But it may mean that (even for your toddler) you’re misattributing adult forms of memory to your little one. Infants and toddlers both live very much in the moment and are still developing the type of robust narrative memory we possess as adults. So while you’re gone, it’s not that you cease to exist. It’s more a case of “out of sight, out of mind.” Will they recognize you when you return? Will they be excited to see you? I’ll let this beautiful video from beingritty on IG show you the answer.

Dan Wuori

30,440 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Children of God, hear me. You have been called into a battle far greater than that of swords and shields, a battle against the unseen powers of darkness that seek to corrupt and consume. Yet, take heart—for the words of the Apostle John ring as a clarion call across the centuries: ‘You are of God, little children and have overcome them, because He who is in you is greater than he who is in the world.’ . This is not merely a declaration, it is a promise. The One who resides within you is the very Spirit of God, the breath that stirred the waters of creation, the power that raised Christ from the grave and the flame that ignites the hearts of the faithful. This indwelling strength is mightier than any force of this world, mightier than the legions of hell that march against you. . Do you see the implication of this truth? The ruler of this world, the enemy of our souls, may seek to sow despair and chaos, yet he trembles before the presence of God within you. The forces of evil thrive on fear, yet they are powerless against a heart that beats with the courage of Christ. What army, what king, what demon can stand against the child of God who walks in the fullness of this promise? None. . Consider this: David, a shepherd boy, faced Goliath not with armor or sword but with the confidence that the God who dwelled within him was greater than the giant before him. Gideon, with only three hundred men, routed a vast army because he relied not on numbers but on the strength of the Almighty. And even Christ Himself, in the wilderness, stood unshaken against Satan, for He bore the fullness of God within Him. In each of these, the truth of 1 John 4:4 was revealed: the power of God in His children cannot be overcome. . Do not be deceived, beloved of God. The trials you face, the adversaries that rise against you, may appear insurmountable. But appearances are the weapon of the enemy, meant to blind you to the truth. You are not alone. The Spirit that moves mountains and silences storms dwells within you. Stand firm in this knowledge. Let it be your shield, your fortress, your banner in battle. . Let the world shake. Let the enemy roar. But you, child of God, stand tall. For He who is in you is greater—greater than fear, greater than sin, greater than death itself. With this truth, you are invincible, for the strength of Heaven courses through your veins. Take up this mantle of faith and stride forward as a conqueror, not in your own might but in the power of the Almighty. . Remember this, and let it guide your steps: you are of God, and He has overcome the world. Therefore, you too shall overcome. Walk boldly in the light of this truth, for the Spirit within you is the light that no darkness can extinguish. #ChristIsKing #WeAreTheStorm

Children of God, hear me. You have been called into a battle far greater than that of swords and shields, a battle against the unseen powers of darkness that seek to corrupt and consume. Yet, take heart—for the words of the Apostle John ring as a clarion call across the centuries: ‘You are of God, little children and have overcome them, because He who is in you is greater than he who is in the world.’ . This is not merely a declaration, it is a promise. The One who resides within you is the very Spirit of God, the breath that stirred the waters of creation, the power that raised Christ from the grave and the flame that ignites the hearts of the faithful. This indwelling strength is mightier than any force of this world, mightier than the legions of hell that march against you. . Do you see the implication of this truth? The ruler of this world, the enemy of our souls, may seek to sow despair and chaos, yet he trembles before the presence of God within you. The forces of evil thrive on fear, yet they are powerless against a heart that beats with the courage of Christ. What army, what king, what demon can stand against the child of God who walks in the fullness of this promise? None. . Consider this: David, a shepherd boy, faced Goliath not with armor or sword but with the confidence that the God who dwelled within him was greater than the giant before him. Gideon, with only three hundred men, routed a vast army because he relied not on numbers but on the strength of the Almighty. And even Christ Himself, in the wilderness, stood unshaken against Satan, for He bore the fullness of God within Him. In each of these, the truth of 1 John 4:4 was revealed: the power of God in His children cannot be overcome. . Do not be deceived, beloved of God. The trials you face, the adversaries that rise against you, may appear insurmountable. But appearances are the weapon of the enemy, meant to blind you to the truth. You are not alone. The Spirit that moves mountains and silences storms dwells within you. Stand firm in this knowledge. Let it be your shield, your fortress, your banner in battle. . Let the world shake. Let the enemy roar. But you, child of God, stand tall. For He who is in you is greater—greater than fear, greater than sin, greater than death itself. With this truth, you are invincible, for the strength of Heaven courses through your veins. Take up this mantle of faith and stride forward as a conqueror, not in your own might but in the power of the Almighty. . Remember this, and let it guide your steps: you are of God, and He has overcome the world. Therefore, you too shall overcome. Walk boldly in the light of this truth, for the Spirit within you is the light that no darkness can extinguish. #ChristIsKing #WeAreTheStorm

The Redeemed

13,822 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Iran, Firing missiles and drones at the UAE to prove you haven't surrendered is in and of itself a form of surrender. It's what you do when the actual levers, as yours, are gone. Trump announced Project Freedom on Sunday night. CENTCOM announced two American vessels had transited the Strait successfully. Your 14 points peace proposal, submitted over the weekend, was swatted away by Washington. Your ports have been blockaded since April 13. The Hormuz stranglehold you spent decades cultivating as your ultimate insurance policy is now being directly challenged by 15,000 American troops and over a hundred aircraft. The UAE, who absorbed more than 90% of your missiles and drones, has been quietly and determinedly rebuilding its rebound story since the ceasefire. Flights are normalizing, investors are trickling back, and the mood in Abu Dhabi and Dubai is visibly shifting from relief to momentum. On Monday, that momentum had a face: “Make It In The Emirates”, the country's biggest industrial expo, opened as a statement that the UAE had turned a page. That's what the ADNOC tanker and the Fujairah port attacks were about: Disrupt the story. It failed. You wanted to tell America that you own Hormuz. If the US escorts ships through it, the Gulf will bleed. You, watching the American military architecture around Iran and reading it as preparation for a second round, wanted to pre-empt a second round and make any decision in that regard more expensive before it gets made. You wanted to tell your exhausted and broken people, who are watching your regime being stripped of its supreme lunatic, its proxies and its nuclear shield, that you still fight, and that you haven’t gone quiet. It is an enormous amount of strategic objectives to load onto a drone or a missile. That gap between what you are trying to say and what you actually have left to say it with, is the real story of Monday’s attack. Iran, You fired at something you could no longer reach. And in that single fact, you told us more about your condition than a hundred diplomatic cables ever could.

Iran, Firing missiles and drones at the UAE to prove you haven't surrendered is in and of itself a form of surrender. It's what you do when the actual levers, as yours, are gone. Trump announced Project Freedom on Sunday night. CENTCOM announced two American vessels had transited the Strait successfully. Your 14 points peace proposal, submitted over the weekend, was swatted away by Washington. Your ports have been blockaded since April 13. The Hormuz stranglehold you spent decades cultivating as your ultimate insurance policy is now being directly challenged by 15,000 American troops and over a hundred aircraft. The UAE, who absorbed more than 90% of your missiles and drones, has been quietly and determinedly rebuilding its rebound story since the ceasefire. Flights are normalizing, investors are trickling back, and the mood in Abu Dhabi and Dubai is visibly shifting from relief to momentum. On Monday, that momentum had a face: “Make It In The Emirates”, the country's biggest industrial expo, opened as a statement that the UAE had turned a page. That's what the ADNOC tanker and the Fujairah port attacks were about: Disrupt the story. It failed. You wanted to tell America that you own Hormuz. If the US escorts ships through it, the Gulf will bleed. You, watching the American military architecture around Iran and reading it as preparation for a second round, wanted to pre-empt a second round and make any decision in that regard more expensive before it gets made. You wanted to tell your exhausted and broken people, who are watching your regime being stripped of its supreme lunatic, its proxies and its nuclear shield, that you still fight, and that you haven’t gone quiet. It is an enormous amount of strategic objectives to load onto a drone or a missile. That gap between what you are trying to say and what you actually have left to say it with, is the real story of Monday’s attack. Iran, You fired at something you could no longer reach. And in that single fact, you told us more about your condition than a hundred diplomatic cables ever could.

Nadim Koteich

29,821 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

Think you’ve got the diagnosis? Think again!! This is a case where the diagnosis is not as important as the lesson it teaches you. Watch the video and then check back for hidden portion of this post to see what the answer is... And what lesson you should have learned from it ! Avidly enhancing T2 dark lesions in the subependymal region with increased diffusion signal. If I said that description to you—even without seeing the images—you would say lymphoma! Was that your answer? It was mine! And we are both wrong! It turned out to be metastatic melanoma. But the lesson here is that just because you were wrong by pathology, doesn’t mean you were wrong on the imaging If I saw a case like this again, I would still say lymphoma! You won’t be right every time—there will be weird cases. But you are making a bet on the imaging appearance and you should always bet the odds—with the risk that every now and then you might be wrong! So don’t remember from this case that metastases can look like lymphoma—remember that sometimes it’s ok to be wrong as long as you read the case right

Think you’ve got the diagnosis? Think again!! This is a case where the diagnosis is not as important as the lesson it teaches you. Watch the video and then check back for hidden portion of this post to see what the answer is... And what lesson you should have learned from it ! Avidly enhancing T2 dark lesions in the subependymal region with increased diffusion signal. If I said that description to you—even without seeing the images—you would say lymphoma! Was that your answer? It was mine! And we are both wrong! It turned out to be metastatic melanoma. But the lesson here is that just because you were wrong by pathology, doesn’t mean you were wrong on the imaging If I saw a case like this again, I would still say lymphoma! You won’t be right every time—there will be weird cases. But you are making a bet on the imaging appearance and you should always bet the odds—with the risk that every now and then you might be wrong! So don’t remember from this case that metastases can look like lymphoma—remember that sometimes it’s ok to be wrong as long as you read the case right

Lea Alhilali, MD

12,351 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren

I’m late to this, but I see both sides of the coin here. On one, of course Kyle Fletcher’s gonna be bummed by getting screwed out of his big stadium moment in front of his family while his anxiety levels were at an all-time high. On the other, I wish he included more context as to why that happened and what happened to Adam Cole, as well as the fact that he may never wrestle again and how that was announced on the day of All In, because it makes complete sense as to why that happened when you take everything into account. Also, I can’t believe I’m saying this again but please walk with me on this one: ADAM. COLE. DID. NOT. GET. HURT. ON. THAT. FUCKING. POWERBOMB. YOU. IMBECILES. Watch his arms hit the fucking apron as his head hits nothing. You can say it was a dumb spot all you want, that’s not why Adam Cole is sitting at home right now.

I’m late to this, but I see both sides of the coin here. On one, of course Kyle Fletcher’s gonna be bummed by getting screwed out of his big stadium moment in front of his family while his anxiety levels were at an all-time high. On the other, I wish he included more context as to why that happened and what happened to Adam Cole, as well as the fact that he may never wrestle again and how that was announced on the day of All In, because it makes complete sense as to why that happened when you take everything into account. Also, I can’t believe I’m saying this again but please walk with me on this one: ADAM. COLE. DID. NOT. GET. HURT. ON. THAT. FUCKING. POWERBOMB. YOU. IMBECILES. Watch his arms hit the fucking apron as his head hits nothing. You can say it was a dumb spot all you want, that’s not why Adam Cole is sitting at home right now.

KLA Clips/KnicksLoseAgain

320,855 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

Bia Omojuwa JJ. Omojuwa , you have been selected to be exposed. You saying that, “The issue with our foreign exchange is our foreign exchange”, statement you attributed to Peter Obi is stupid, simply exposed the entire emptiness of your head, is a loud announcement of your own shallow grasp of language, economics, and critical reasoning. First, what you heard is a rhetorical device known as antimetabole, the deliberate repetition of words in reverse order to expose a deeper truth. It is not a tongue twister. It is a sharp critique of how Nigeria’s foreign exchange crisis is caused not by external forces but by how we ourselves manage, manipulate, and mishandle the system. You thought it was gibberish because your ears function faster than your brain. You heard words and panicked. Second, the line is conceptually layered. In just a few words, it diagnoses the entire economic dysfunction: policy inconsistency, artificial rates, corruption in forex allocation, and institutional failure. But of course, to catch that, you would need more than ears. You would need understanding, something you have never encountered. Third, it is what we call economy of language, the ability to say so much with so little. That level of expression requires thought. You, on the other hand, just react. You heard a sentence that challenged your comprehension and defaulted to mockery because critical thought is foreign to you. You think volume equals intelligence and that confidence can cover for comprehension. It can’t. Let us be clear. The statement isn’t stupid. You are. Loud, clueless, and proud of it. You don’t recognize depth because your mind never developed the tools to measure it. You heard a profound line and mistook it for nonsense. That says everything about you and nothing about Peter Obi. Next time you hear something that confuses you, do not speak. Just nod and walk away. You might save yourself from yet another public display of illiteracy. Not everything is meant for surface thinkers. While you’re at it, try and get some sleep. You look sick and completely unkempt, judging by the eyebags, the cracked lips, and the four conflicting facial tones fighting for attention.

Bia Omojuwa JJ. Omojuwa , you have been selected to be exposed. You saying that, “The issue with our foreign exchange is our foreign exchange”, statement you attributed to Peter Obi is stupid, simply exposed the entire emptiness of your head, is a loud announcement of your own shallow grasp of language, economics, and critical reasoning. First, what you heard is a rhetorical device known as antimetabole, the deliberate repetition of words in reverse order to expose a deeper truth. It is not a tongue twister. It is a sharp critique of how Nigeria’s foreign exchange crisis is caused not by external forces but by how we ourselves manage, manipulate, and mishandle the system. You thought it was gibberish because your ears function faster than your brain. You heard words and panicked. Second, the line is conceptually layered. In just a few words, it diagnoses the entire economic dysfunction: policy inconsistency, artificial rates, corruption in forex allocation, and institutional failure. But of course, to catch that, you would need more than ears. You would need understanding, something you have never encountered. Third, it is what we call economy of language, the ability to say so much with so little. That level of expression requires thought. You, on the other hand, just react. You heard a sentence that challenged your comprehension and defaulted to mockery because critical thought is foreign to you. You think volume equals intelligence and that confidence can cover for comprehension. It can’t. Let us be clear. The statement isn’t stupid. You are. Loud, clueless, and proud of it. You don’t recognize depth because your mind never developed the tools to measure it. You heard a profound line and mistook it for nonsense. That says everything about you and nothing about Peter Obi. Next time you hear something that confuses you, do not speak. Just nod and walk away. You might save yourself from yet another public display of illiteracy. Not everything is meant for surface thinkers. While you’re at it, try and get some sleep. You look sick and completely unkempt, judging by the eyebags, the cracked lips, and the four conflicting facial tones fighting for attention.

𝑻𝑯𝑬 𝑮𝑬𝑵𝑬𝑹𝑨𝑳 𝑺𝑵𝑶𝑾 🇨🇮

95,847 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

The Catholic Church has been consistently AGAINST divorce and separation for 2000 years. Marriage is not a wedding day, it is a death. The death of the isolated self. The death of the idea that your life belongs only to you. Before God, two people walk forward and allow themselves to be bound together, not with flowers or words, but with sacrifice. The same love that held Christ on the Cross was not soft. Iron tore through flesh and pinned Him to the wood, and He did not pull away. That is the image people do not want to see when they talk about love. Love costs blood. Love costs pride. Love costs the part of you that wants to run when things hurt. When a man and a woman become one flesh, it is not sentimental language. It is a joining that says, your suffering is now mine, your burdens are now mine, your future is now mine. You do not stand beside each other as spectators. You are fastened together and sent into battle. The world you raise children in will not be gentle. It will test you, divide you, try to convince you that commitment is a mistake and sacrifice is weakness. Marriage answers that lie with defiance. You stay. You endure. You forgive when it would be easier to walk away. You carry each other when one collapses. The vows are not promises made for the good days. They are spoken for the nights when everything feels broken and you choose each other anyway. This is why marriage is sacred. Not because it is easy, but because it mirrors something eternal. Christ did not abandon His bride when she failed Him. He stayed nailed there. So when you stand before God and bind your life to another, understand what you are stepping into. You are choosing covenant over comfort. You are choosing unity over ego. Catholic Weddings are auraful.

The Catholic Church has been consistently AGAINST divorce and separation for 2000 years. Marriage is not a wedding day, it is a death. The death of the isolated self. The death of the idea that your life belongs only to you. Before God, two people walk forward and allow themselves to be bound together, not with flowers or words, but with sacrifice. The same love that held Christ on the Cross was not soft. Iron tore through flesh and pinned Him to the wood, and He did not pull away. That is the image people do not want to see when they talk about love. Love costs blood. Love costs pride. Love costs the part of you that wants to run when things hurt. When a man and a woman become one flesh, it is not sentimental language. It is a joining that says, your suffering is now mine, your burdens are now mine, your future is now mine. You do not stand beside each other as spectators. You are fastened together and sent into battle. The world you raise children in will not be gentle. It will test you, divide you, try to convince you that commitment is a mistake and sacrifice is weakness. Marriage answers that lie with defiance. You stay. You endure. You forgive when it would be easier to walk away. You carry each other when one collapses. The vows are not promises made for the good days. They are spoken for the nights when everything feels broken and you choose each other anyway. This is why marriage is sacred. Not because it is easy, but because it mirrors something eternal. Christ did not abandon His bride when she failed Him. He stayed nailed there. So when you stand before God and bind your life to another, understand what you are stepping into. You are choosing covenant over comfort. You are choosing unity over ego. Catholic Weddings are auraful.

𝔻𝕣. 𝔾𝕣𝕠𝕪𝕡𝕖𝕣 🇻🇦🇺🇸

31,492 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

🤨 “Gaza Is The ONLY Issue That Matters” Yasmin Alibhai-Brown has once again shown just how detached some public voices have become from the reality facing ordinary people in Britain. During a debate about Prime Minister Andy Burnham’s listening tour and the urgent questions of what he can and should do about the cost of living crisis and the many other huge problems crushing this country, she declared: “I know Andy and I like him but I still won’t vote for him because the ONLY issue that matters to me is what’s he’s going to do on Gaza and he hasn’t answered that.” Not the NHS. Not housing. Not energy bills. Not crime. Not immigration. Not the state of the economy. Just Gaza. This is not principled. It is obsessive. It is a textbook example of someone elevating a distant conflict, however tragic, above the actual, immediate suffering of the people who live here and pay the taxes that keep the lights on. How many more voices like this are there, treating Britain as an afterthought while demanding politicians prioritise foreign policy litmus tests over which they have almost no real control?” When your own country is struggling with stagnant wages, broken public services and a genuine cost of living emergency, announcing that none of it counts unless the politician says the right words about Gaza is just insane to me. You can care about Gaza. Plenty of people do. But when you openly say it is the only thing that matters, and you would reject someone you otherwise like purely on that basis while ignoring everything else, you have stopped talking about politics and started performing purity. And that performance is coming at the expense of the country you actually live in.

🤨 “Gaza Is The ONLY Issue That Matters” Yasmin Alibhai-Brown has once again shown just how detached some public voices have become from the reality facing ordinary people in Britain. During a debate about Prime Minister Andy Burnham’s listening tour and the urgent questions of what he can and should do about the cost of living crisis and the many other huge problems crushing this country, she declared: “I know Andy and I like him but I still won’t vote for him because the ONLY issue that matters to me is what’s he’s going to do on Gaza and he hasn’t answered that.” Not the NHS. Not housing. Not energy bills. Not crime. Not immigration. Not the state of the economy. Just Gaza. This is not principled. It is obsessive. It is a textbook example of someone elevating a distant conflict, however tragic, above the actual, immediate suffering of the people who live here and pay the taxes that keep the lights on. How many more voices like this are there, treating Britain as an afterthought while demanding politicians prioritise foreign policy litmus tests over which they have almost no real control?” When your own country is struggling with stagnant wages, broken public services and a genuine cost of living emergency, announcing that none of it counts unless the politician says the right words about Gaza is just insane to me. You can care about Gaza. Plenty of people do. But when you openly say it is the only thing that matters, and you would reject someone you otherwise like purely on that basis while ignoring everything else, you have stopped talking about politics and started performing purity. And that performance is coming at the expense of the country you actually live in.

J Stewart

66,722 Aufrufe • vor 18 Tagen

These are clips culled from the videos we all watched. You people and the man have lied that the girl said, "Who does this man think he is?" Meanwhile, the video evidence in the first frame shows that all she said was,"Can you imagine? What is this?" Video evidence in the second frame shows that the man was holding onto the neck of her dress and pulling it towards himself; a dress with a low neckline, which means that by pulling it away from her, he exposed her breasts to full public view. Anyone with a height higher than that neckline would have a clear view of that girl's breasts. That same video evidence shows that all the girl did initially was try to get his hands off her dress, and only swung at him and pulled his own clothing when he refused to let go. Twist this issue all you like. It does not change the facts on video. You people expected the girl to cower and accept to be treated like an animal just because the man is an elder and a lecturer.

These are clips culled from the videos we all watched. You people and the man have lied that the girl said, "Who does this man think he is?" Meanwhile, the video evidence in the first frame shows that all she said was,"Can you imagine? What is this?" Video evidence in the second frame shows that the man was holding onto the neck of her dress and pulling it towards himself; a dress with a low neckline, which means that by pulling it away from her, he exposed her breasts to full public view. Anyone with a height higher than that neckline would have a clear view of that girl's breasts. That same video evidence shows that all the girl did initially was try to get his hands off her dress, and only swung at him and pulled his own clothing when he refused to let go. Twist this issue all you like. It does not change the facts on video. You people expected the girl to cower and accept to be treated like an animal just because the man is an elder and a lecturer.

KWEKU THE HUSTLER NWA PETER OBI

31,653 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Open Letter to MP Iqbal Mohamed, I recently watched your video where you stated: “Let the West… let the enemies not divide us.” Since you are a sitting Member of the British Parliament, this raises some serious questions that demand clarification: 1. If the West is your “enemy,” then what exactly are you doing representing a British constituency in the UK Parliament – which sits in the heart of the West, in London? You cannot call the very nation you serve an enemy while holding public office within it. 2. Do you genuinely feel safe living among these “enemies” in the UK? If you truly believe this country and its people are hostile, then standing for political office here contradicts your own statement. 3. Are you stepping back from the oath you took – in the name of Allah – to bear true faith and allegiance to His Majesty King Charles and to uphold the laws and values of the United Kingdom? Your words appear fundamentally at odds with the responsibilities and loyalty required of a British MP. 4. How do you justify using taxpayer-funded British institutions, resources, and a parliamentary salary while simultaneously portraying the West as an enemy? It raises questions about integrity and the proper use of public office. 5. When you say “the West,” are you including your own voters in Dewsbury & Batley – the people who trusted you with their mandate? Do you also view them as part of this so-called enemy? 6. Is it appropriate for an MP to label the UK or “the West” as an enemy when this rhetoric risks increasing hostility and creating fear within communities? 7. Will you publicly clarify whether your allegiance lies with the British Constitution and your oath of office, or with overseas political movements that contradict your commitments as a UK MP? Finally, Do you consider yourself a British representative in Pakistan-linked events or a Pakistan representative inside the British Parliament? Richard Tice MP 🇬🇧 Nigel Farage MP Reform UK The Reform Daily Zia Yusuf #MPIqbalMohamed #West #ReformUK

Open Letter to MP Iqbal Mohamed, I recently watched your video where you stated: “Let the West… let the enemies not divide us.” Since you are a sitting Member of the British Parliament, this raises some serious questions that demand clarification: 1. If the West is your “enemy,” then what exactly are you doing representing a British constituency in the UK Parliament – which sits in the heart of the West, in London? You cannot call the very nation you serve an enemy while holding public office within it. 2. Do you genuinely feel safe living among these “enemies” in the UK? If you truly believe this country and its people are hostile, then standing for political office here contradicts your own statement. 3. Are you stepping back from the oath you took – in the name of Allah – to bear true faith and allegiance to His Majesty King Charles and to uphold the laws and values of the United Kingdom? Your words appear fundamentally at odds with the responsibilities and loyalty required of a British MP. 4. How do you justify using taxpayer-funded British institutions, resources, and a parliamentary salary while simultaneously portraying the West as an enemy? It raises questions about integrity and the proper use of public office. 5. When you say “the West,” are you including your own voters in Dewsbury & Batley – the people who trusted you with their mandate? Do you also view them as part of this so-called enemy? 6. Is it appropriate for an MP to label the UK or “the West” as an enemy when this rhetoric risks increasing hostility and creating fear within communities? 7. Will you publicly clarify whether your allegiance lies with the British Constitution and your oath of office, or with overseas political movements that contradict your commitments as a UK MP? Finally, Do you consider yourself a British representative in Pakistan-linked events or a Pakistan representative inside the British Parliament? Richard Tice MP 🇬🇧 Nigel Farage MP Reform UK The Reform Daily Zia Yusuf #MPIqbalMohamed #West #ReformUK

Prabhdeep Singh

263,795 Aufrufe • vor 9 Monaten

The Hug of a Hyena: A Warning to the Kinshasa Opposition Before the tragedy, there is a warm embrace; after it, nothing but crushed bones. There is an old, cautionary fable about a man who carried a hyena on his back wherever he went. Seeing this, a passerby stopped him and warned, "My friend, put that beast down. One day, that hyena will make you its lunch." The man ignored the advice and kept walking. A second man approached him with the exact same warning. Again, the man brushed it off, confident in his bond with the predator. Eventually, curiosity got the better of the man. He turned to the beast on his back and said, "Hey, my friend, people keep telling me that you are going to eat me. Is it true?" The hyena, at least, was brutally honest. It whispered into his ear: "You should always fear a threat that two or three men have already warned you about." Before the man could even process the words, it was too late. The hyena gave him no time to think, snapping its jaws shut. This fable perfectly illustrates the fatal mistake of forming an alliance with Félix Tshisekedi. He is political death on legs. It is tragic to watch the opposition in Kinshasa place their faith in a man who is ready to sell out the entire country, and himself along with it, just to retain the presidency. Having tasted the luxury of flying across the world millions of times, he has absolutely no intention of ever going back to a normal life. The political diagnosis is clear: the only cure for the nation is his absolute removal from that office. And for many, the only viable path left to achieve that is through the AFC-M23, for DRC to be at Peace.

The Hug of a Hyena: A Warning to the Kinshasa Opposition Before the tragedy, there is a warm embrace; after it, nothing but crushed bones. There is an old, cautionary fable about a man who carried a hyena on his back wherever he went. Seeing this, a passerby stopped him and warned, "My friend, put that beast down. One day, that hyena will make you its lunch." The man ignored the advice and kept walking. A second man approached him with the exact same warning. Again, the man brushed it off, confident in his bond with the predator. Eventually, curiosity got the better of the man. He turned to the beast on his back and said, "Hey, my friend, people keep telling me that you are going to eat me. Is it true?" The hyena, at least, was brutally honest. It whispered into his ear: "You should always fear a threat that two or three men have already warned you about." Before the man could even process the words, it was too late. The hyena gave him no time to think, snapping its jaws shut. This fable perfectly illustrates the fatal mistake of forming an alliance with Félix Tshisekedi. He is political death on legs. It is tragic to watch the opposition in Kinshasa place their faith in a man who is ready to sell out the entire country, and himself along with it, just to retain the presidency. Having tasted the luxury of flying across the world millions of times, he has absolutely no intention of ever going back to a normal life. The political diagnosis is clear: the only cure for the nation is his absolute removal from that office. And for many, the only viable path left to achieve that is through the AFC-M23, for DRC to be at Peace.

Manzi Willy

20,594 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten