Sensitive content

This media may contain sensitive content.

Video yükleniyor...

Video Yüklenemedi

Ana Sayfaya Dön

When a handsome guy gives big head - docking style! This was a challenge! #docking #bigdick #foreskin #uncut #intact #headspin #cockring #dockandroll Intact & Restored 🍆 Scandinavian Shoutout Channel (11.4 k) #Zebratos

238,165 görüntüleme • 6 ay önce •via X (Twitter)

0 Yorum

Yorum bulunmuyor

Orijinal gönderinin yorumları burada görünecek

Benzer Videolar

40 Years Ago Today 26th of March 1958 - 15th of May 1986 🇮🇹 Elio de Angelis - 28 years of age ⚠️ Information about the fatal accident Elio de Angelis was a prominent Italian Formula One driver known for his elegance, musical talent, and technical skill. Often called the "last gentleman player" of F1, he was highly respected by his peers for his polite demeanor and fair racing style. Racing Career (1979–1986) De Angelis competed in 108 Grands Prix, primarily for Lotus, where he achieved his greatest successes. Death and Circumstances De Angelis died following a testing accident on May 14, 1986, at the Paul Ricard Circuit in France. The Accident During a test session, the rear wing of his Brabham BT55 detached at approximately 270 km/h. The loss of downforce caused the car to cartwheel over a barrier and land upside down, where it caught fire. This being a test day, nobody witnessed the whole incident, although two Benetton mechanics manning a speed trap caught the final stages. The car became airborne and then flipped into a series of rolls that pitched it over the guardrail, before it eventually came to rest inverted. The survival cell was intact, but the rollhoop and the fuel tank had been damaged as the car bounced over the barrier, and fuel was leaking out. De Angelis himself had suffered only a broken collarbone. Initially there was only some smoke. With little official help – Alan Jones who was the first driver on the scene said later that he was joined by two marshals wearing shorts "who just didn't have a clue" – attempts to turn the car over proved fruitless. Gradually a fire took hold. Meanwhile drivers, crew members from Brabham and other teams began to arrive from the pits. It was all too apparent that, this being a test day, there was insufficient safety cover – there was no Prof Sid Watkins, no fire vehicle and, it soon emerged, no helicopter. The main problem was not being able to turn it over. Because he was not badly injured he could have been pulled out pretty quickly, had the fire been kept down a bit. Eventually de Angelis was removed from the car. He'd been starved of oxygen by the flames, and it was discovered that he had no heartbeat. "We took his helmet off, and we really weren't sure of his condition," said Alexander. "Here was this guy with absolutely nothing wrong with him as far as we could see – there was no blood, nothing. "There was a young medical guy there with us, who didn't speak English, and in the end he got out a big syringe and stuck it in his chest. "Eventually a helicopter came, with some paramedics. They checked his pulse and stuff, and the line was moving. We carried the stretcher over to the helicopter." Having been resuscitated, de Angelis was transferred to the same hospital and seen by the same doctors who had treated Frank Williams after his road accident just a few months earlier. The rescue had come too late for de Angelis, and he died the following day in hospital, a victim of asphyxiation. Horrendous and so preventable 🥹💔 A clip of Elio de Angelis and his first win 🏆 R.I.P 💔💔 🎥 Formula 1 #italy #cars #france #accident

WRCPAST

53,553 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

In Set 9, I was Top 10 in BoxBox Bootcamp. There were 36 minutes until elimination, and I only needed 5 LP (a 4th) to make it to the cutoff. By a stroke of luck, a queue pops with 33 minutes left on the clock. A TFT game is typically 35 minutes, which meant I would have to surrender to end the game prematurely to get the 4th rather than playing it out I played out of my mind and did not say a single word for 32 minutes straight, and I found myself fighting for a Top 4 with 5 HP left. The guy in 5th had 3 HP, so in this last round, I just needed him to die with less units killed. I hit a necessary 5-cost Aatrox on my LAST BIT OF GOLD and my board spikes. The best case scenario happens, I get a <2 unit loss, my opponent takes a 4 unit loss. I see my chat in my peripheral vision going crazy because I realized I was gonna make the cutoff with less than a minute left. With adrenaline pumping and "I have to forfeit ASAP" in my head, I type /ff... But... because I didn't wait for the death animation to finish, I surrender before the next round comes. When you surrender in TFT, your health goes straight to -99. When I saw the results screen, I froze. My limbs were cold from the nerves, but I didn't even feel it. I looked at my screen in despair, as I had just witnessed the end of my bootcamp run. The clip below is from my only TFT upload on my channel. In Set 14, I got #2 in the Bootcamp and lost by 1 game's worth of LP. #1 grinded more, wanted it more, and improved like a beast. I could only respect such a gallant victory. (shoutout niamocha) Thank you BoxBox for giving me these chances to compete. I will change my fate this set.

Kariyu

147,847 görüntüleme • 7 ay önce

Hasan goes off on Asmongold for his tweet about systematic racism and not being nearly as relevant as him Also says he might get similar views on YouTube if u were to count all his clip channels, points out that his ops are in the mainstream rather than Twitch, and that he hasn't mentioned Asmon in a month "I think he still does a good deal of (ruining gaming communities)..this is the Elon Musk style, no they are genetically inferior and socioeconomic conditions are a cope" "Ya I know (he's been calling me a Muslim terr*rist)..I mean I didn't know that he was doing that but I'm not surprised..bc I have the top channels up here..every now and then I'll glance..when Asmongold is live, his thumbnail is almost always my face..and his fanbase will say u talk about him nonstop" "The last time he got a Twitch ban he didn't actually receive the support he thought he would..first time I've brought Asmongold up..reason why he's posting sh*t like this..trying to grab on to as much as relevance as possible and he's failing to do so" "He'll make more videos, I assume..Idk if he still is making videos about me, I haven't really checked in" "Lol what..he gets more views than u on every platform" - chatter "I love the lone Asmongold warrior in chat..I'm not entirely certain that's the case, if u look at the overall views I garner from the Hasanabi industrial complex..spite based politics is very successful" "This is the final level of cope (that we both talk about each other)..if u key search Asmongold in my YT channel and keyword search on his..he talks about me quite a bit..I actually have leveled up on my ops a little bit more than random unwashed sweaty loser gamers..he's still stuck chirping about me" "Ur a k pop stan for an ugly ducking..for a guy who presents himself as working class bc he's nasty and he wears the same t shirt and ur stupid enough not to realize he's a multimillionaire who owns multiple businesses..some of which have cratered as a consequence of his toxic repulsive politics" "Talk to me when he actually has real ops..not just Twitch streamers like myself who forget to mention him for a month..no matter how desperately he tries, nobody gives a sh*t about what he has to say..how many ppl do u think would show up for an Asmongold meetup"

yeet

29,139 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

So Jefferson Morley says that "the evidence does not support the notion that Lee Harvey Oswald killed the president." Jeff relies on the eyewitness account of one of the Parkland doctors who treated JFK at Dallas, Bob McClelland. And he says I failed in Case Closed to challenge Dr. McClelland's credibility. Below is an excerpt from CASE CLOSED, Chapter 13, “He Had A Death Look: Parkland and Bethesda." Read it and decide for yourselves what you believe. And check my source notes, almost all based on my own interviews in 1992 with the chief attending Parkland doctors. It is their judgment of Dr. McClelland's account that is critically important. “However, some of the Parkland doctors who treated the President described a gaping wound in the rear of JFK’s head (the occipital region), not the right side (the parietal). If true, this not only contradicted the findings of the autopsy team but was evidence that the President was probably shot from the front, with a large exit hole in the rear of the head. Several Parkland doctors also thought they saw cerebellum, tissue from the base of the brain, on the stretcher or in the operating room. Yet, the autopsy photos of the brain show the cerebellum intact. If the Parkland descriptions of the cerebellum were true, this raised legitimate questions over the authenticity of the photographs of JFK’s brain, which showed no such damage. Robert Groden and Harrison Livingstone, in their book High Treason, devote more than thirty pages to highlighting this conflict between the Parkland and Bethesda descriptions of the head wound. However, it is questionable to rely on the Parkland doctors for any assertion about the head wound since, by their own admission, they did not examine it in detail. When Dr. Kemp Clark looked at the wound to determine whether the President could be revived, it was the first time it had been examined. “From what I read in later books, everyone looked at it in detail from the beginning, but that is not true,” recalls Dr. Jenkins. “We were trying to save the President, and no one had time to examine the wounds. As for the head wound, they couldn’t look at it earlier because I was standing with my body against it, and they would only have looked at my pants.”83 “We never had the opportunity to review his wounds,” Dr. Carrico told the author, “in order to describe them accurately. We were trying to save his life.”84 Dr. Adolph Giesecke agrees: “We had no time to examine the wounds. That was to be done by a forensic pathologist, not by us.”85 “I don’t think any of us got a good look at the head wound,” confirms Dr. Perry. “I didn’t examine it or really look at it that carefully.”86 “And when we realized he was dead,” Dr. Baxter recalls, “none of us had the heart to go and examine the head wound while Mrs. Kennedy was in the room. We all just made our way out of the room.”87 “When things were over with,” Dr. Jones says, “you felt it was her time and you should get out of there and let her be alone with him.”88 Dr. Baden of the Select Committee concurs: “Parkland was not concerned with whether the bullet was going from front to back or vice versa, they were only treating the symptoms, not the wounds. Some of them could be good surgeons but lousy pathologists. A third of the time, an autopsy shows something was missed by the treating doctors at the hospital. In unnatural deaths, it is common for the treating physicians to mix up stab wounds and gun shots, and they are wrong half the time about exit or entrance. The Parkland doctors did not clean Kennedy off—there is just no way they could have hazarded a real guess about that wound, since it was covered with blood and tissue. If they say they saw cerebellum, they are just wrong because the cerebellum was perfect. And if they say there was a large hole in the rear of the head, they don’t know what they are talking about since there is nothing there but the entry injury in the rear cowlick. The mistakes in judgments from Parkland are exactly why we have autopsies. “One of the most important aspects of the Zapruder film, often overlooked by the critics, are the frames immediately after the President was shot in the head. It’s very clear on the enhanced frames that there is a wound over the right ear, but the back of the head is clean. That film is incontrovertible evidence that there was no defect on the rear of the head.”89 Yet mistaken descriptions of what the Parkland doctors did and saw continue to be published. High Treason asserts that some doctors examined the wound with a flashlight and that Dr. Jenkins picked the head up from the stretcher to show other doctors the extent of the rear wound.90 The eight principal doctors who attended to JFK on that day all told the author that such reports were false. Moreover, Groden and Livingstone cite early interviews and some testimony before the Warren Commission to support their hypothesis that the Parkland doctors saw a different head wound than the one described at Bethesda.* Yet the Parkland physicians, in their discussions with the author, were almost unanimous in supporting the autopsy findings that the massive exit wound was on the right side (parietal) of the President’s head, not the rear (occipital), and that there was no sign of damaged cerebellum tissue. They insisted that the explainable differences in the wound descriptions between them and the Bethesda doctors have been exploited by conspiracy writers, who created a controversy where none exists. Some admitted that their early statements about the wounds, which they now consider to be mistaken, may have contributed to the confusion. Dr. Bill Midgett, who helped wheel the President from the limousine into trauma room one, says, “The President had quite thick hair, and there was a lot of blood and tissue. All of us were so shocked … and to have Mrs. Kennedy there—none of us stared very closely to see the wound. But it was more parietal than occipital—that much I could see. I did not turn the President over to look, but there was no cerebellum in that car or on the people.” “We did say there was a parietal-occipital wound,” recalls Dr. Carrico. “We did say we saw shattered brain, cerebellum, in the cortex area, and I think we were mistaken. The reason I say that is that the President was lying on his back and shoulders, and you could see the hole, with scalp and brain tissue hanging back down his head, and it covered most of the occipital portion of his head. We saw a large hole on the right side of his head. I don’t believe we saw any occipital bone. It was not there. It was parietal bone. And if we said otherwise, we were mistaken.”91 Dr. Giesecke also admits an error in his original testimony when he described the wound as more occipital. “I guess I have to say that I was wrong in my Warren Commission testimony on the wound and in some of my pronouncements since then. I just never got that good of a look at it. But, for instance, Lifton spent six hours with me trying to get me to say the wounds were like he wanted them. The truth is there was a massive head wound, with brain tissue and blood around it. And with that type of wound you could not get accurate information unless you feel around inside the hole and look into it in detail, and I certainly didn’t do that, nor did I see anyone else do that.”92 Dr. Peters had said that the cerebellum was damaged. “I saw the photograph of the brain when I was in Washington for the Nova program, and I saw the cerebellum was depressed, but it was not lacerated or torn. It is definitely pressed down and that would be the damage I referred to in 1964.… The only thing I would say is that over the last twenty-eight years I now believe the head wound is more forward than I first placed it. More to the side than the rear. I tried to tell Lifton where the wound was, but he did not want to hear.” Dr. Jenkins’s original report also stated he saw cerebellum. “The description of the cerebellum was my fault,” he says. “When I read my report over, I realized there could not be any cerebellum. The autopsy photo, with the rear of the head intact and a protrusion in the parietal region, is the way I remember it. I never did say occipital.”93* “I did not really look at it that closely,” says Dr. Perry. “But like everyone else, I saw it back there. It was in the occipital/ parietal area. The occipital and parietal bone join each other, so we are only talking a centimeter or so in difference. And you must remember the President had a lot of hair, and it was bloody and matted, and it was difficult to tell where that wound started or finished. I did not see any cerebellum.”94 Dr. Baxter agrees that it was difficult to determine the precise location of the wound when treating the President: “He had such a bushy head of hair, and blood and all in it, you couldn’t tell what was wound versus dried blood or dangling tissue. I have been misquoted enough on this, some saying I claimed the whole back of his head was blown away. That’s just wrong. I never even saw the back of his head. The wound was on the right side, not the back.”95 Dr. Jones makes the same observation, saying he did not even know there was a head wound for several minutes, and then finally realized it was a “large side wound, with blood and tissue that extended toward the rear, from what you could tell of the mess that was there.”96 Dr. Giesecke agrees “that the occipital and parietal region are so close together it is possible to mistake one for the other.”97 The only Parkland doctors who still believe they saw a wound in the rear of the head, as well as seeing cerebellum, are Robert McClelland and Charles Crenshaw. “I saw a piece of cerebellum fall out on the stretcher,” says McClelland, who claims he was in the best position of any of the doctors to view the head wound.98 He drew a sketch in 1967 for Josiah Thompson’s book Six Seconds in Dallas, which showed a gaping wound in the rear of the head.99 “I am astonished that Bob would say that,” says Dr. Malcolm Perry. “It shows such poor judgment, and usually he has such good judgment.”100 “I don’t think Bob McClelland was in the best place to see the head wound,” says Dr. Peters. “He wasn’t in that position the way I remember it, as he was on the other side of the table. As for Dr. McClelland saying he saw cerebellum fall out on the table, I never saw anything like that.”101 “Bob is an excellent surgeon,” says Dr. Jenkins. “He knows anatomy. I hate to say Bob is mistaken, but that is clearly not right. In 1988, when I went to the National Archives, the photos showed the President’s brain was crenelated from the trauma, and it resembled cerebellum, but it was not cerebellar tissue. I think it has thrown off a lot of people that saw it. I guess a last point is that Bob and Groden [co-author of High Treason] are such good friends, I believe it has changed his attitude.”102 “McClelland may be a fine surgeon, but he is a lousy pathologist,” says Baden. “I am sure he thinks he saw that, and has developed it in his mind. But his memory is just completely wrong, and the autopsy photos and X rays prove that.”103* Dr. Crenshaw wrote a book in 1992 in which he claimed he examined the wound, that the hole was in the rear of the head, and that the cerebellum was lacerated.104† Crenshaw, a junior resident at the time, arrived late at trauma room one and assisted for only a few minutes near the end. He was in no position to make the judgments he sensationally proclaimed in his book. In fact, his role was so minor that most of the other doctors do not even remember him. “I don’t remember Dr. Crenshaw in the room,” says Dr. Ron Jones. “I don’t remember him in there at any time, but he may have been,” recalls Dr. Jenkins. “Neither do I,” says Dr. Baxter. “I feel sorry for him,” says Dr. Perry. “I had thought about suing him, but when I saw him on television [promoting his book], my anger melted. He has to know that what he said is false, and he knows the rest of us know that. You have to pity him. What a way to end his career. His story is filled with half-truths and insinuations, and those of us who know him know he is desperate.… He is a pitiful sight.” A senior Dallas doctor who is a close Crenshaw friend told the author, “I think it is a bag of worms of ego, going over the hill, the last hurrah.” While almost all the Parkland doctors who treated JFK support the findings of the autopsy team, their confirmation may not be as important as the studies conducted by subsequent panels of experts. The Clark and Rockefeller commissions, as well as the House Select Committee’s medical panel, affirm the original autopsy conclusions about JFK’s head wound. The most detailed work was done by the Select Committee. All nine forensic pathologists agreed that the beveling of the skull and the damage to the brain meant the small rear hole in the President’s head was an entrance wound.105 The exit hole was consistent with a wound caused by the two large bullet fragments found in the front of the President’s car.106* SOURCE NOTES 83. Interview with Dr. Pepper Jenkins, March 10, 1992. 84. Interview with Dr. Charles Carrico, March 8, 1992. 85. Interview with Dr. Adolph Giesecke, March 5, 1992. 86. Interview with Dr. Malcolm Perry, April 2, 1992. 87. Interview with Dr. Charles Baxter, March 12, 1992. 88. Interview with Dr. Ron Jones, April 14, 1992. 89. Interviews with Dr. Michael Baden, February 1, 1992, and November 7, 1992. 90. Groden and Livingstone, op. cit., p. 46. 91. Interview with Dr. Charles Carrico, March 8, 1992. 92. Interview with Dr. Adolph Giesecke, March 5, 1992. 93. Interview with Dr. Pepper Jenkins, March 3, 1992. 94. Interview with Dr. Malcolm Perry, April 2, 1992. 95. Interview with Dr. Charles Baxter, March 12, 1992. 96. Interview with Dr. Ron Jones, April 14, 1992. 97. Interview with Dr. Adolph Giesecke, March 5, 1992. 98. Interview with Dr. Robert McClelland, March 9, 1992. 99. Thompson, Six Seconds in Dallas, p. 140. 100. Interview with Dr. Malcolm Perry, April 2, 1992. 101. Interview with Dr. Paul Peters, March 10, 1992; Dr. Peters also drew a diagram that showed the doctors’ positions around the table and provided it to the author. 102. Interview with Dr. Pepper Jenkins, March 10, 1992. 103. Interview with Dr. Michael Baden, February 1, 1992. 104. Charles Crenshaw, op. cit., p. 88. 105. HSCA Vol. VII, pp. 110, 115. 106. Ibid., p. 128. AND the Footnotes to that section *Although no one at Parkland saw JFK’s back wound, Dr. Pepper Jenkins later told Dr. John Lattimer that he had felt it with his finger when he positioned the President’s head and neck to facilitate the passage of oxygen (Kennedy and Lincoln, p. 153). * After the autopsy, Humes and Boswell wrote their report from memory, without the benefit of the photographs or X rays. Robert Kennedy, who feared the public display of the X rays and photos would be offensive to the Kennedy family, reached an agreement with the Warren Commission not to publish the materials, and except for Earl Warren, the commissioners did not examine them. When the film was turned over to the custody of the National Archives in 1966, a metal box containing the President’s brain was missing from the inventory, together with some tissue slides. Humes had given everything from the autopsy, including the brain, to JFK’s personal physician, Admiral George Burkley. “He told me,” said Humes, “that the [Kennedy] family wanted to inter the brain with the President’s body” (Journal of the American Medical Association, May 27, 1992, Vol. 267, No. 20, p. 2803). The House Select Committee concluded that Robert Kennedy likely disposed of the material for fear it would become a lurid public exhibition (HSCA Vol. VII, pp. 367–68). * In 1988, four of the Parkland doctors—Pepper Jenkins, Richard Dulaney, Paul Peters, and Robert McClelland—went to the National Archives at the invitation of a PBS documentary show, Nova, about the assassination. They were the first Parkland physicians to see the autopsy photographs, and each confirmed the photos represented what they remembered seeing that day, including a picture of the rear of President Kennedy’s head, which shows no defect. It has been suggested that the reason the photo shows the rear of the President’s head as undamaged is because the doctor (whose fingers are present in the picture) is holding a large flap of skin to cover the rear defect. “False,” says Dr. Michael Baden. “There is no flap of skin there. There is a bony protrusion from the right side of the head, but the rear is undamaged, except for the entry hole near the top of the skull” (Interview, January 23, 1992). * High Treason asserts that Jenkins originally said JFK was shot in the chest. Jenkins laughed when the author read him the Groden and Livingstone charge. “I don’t know where they get this stuff from. We put tubes into the President’s chest, but there were no chest wounds caused by anything else.” * In his original report, McClelland said there was a wound to the left temple, one that does not show up on any autopsy X ray or photograph. This has caused some to charge that Kennedy was shot by a second gunman from another location at Dealey, and that the autopsy team either negligently or intentionally overlooked that wound. “I’ll tell you how that happened,” Dr. Jenkins explained to the author. “When Bob McClelland came into the room, he asked me, ‘Where are his wounds?’ And at that time I was operating a breathing bag with my right hand, and was trying to take the President’s temporal pulse, and I had my finger on his left temple. Bob thought I pointed to the left temple as the wound.” † Crenshaw also said the autopsy photograph of the tracheotomy opening on Kennedy’s neck shows that it was larger than it had been at Parkland, implying that additional surgery might have been done between Parkland and Bethesda. “That’s ridiculous,” Dr. Malcolm Perry told the author. “I did the procedure. Tracheotomies are not pretty things, as speed is of the essence. Tissue can sag and stretch after death, but the photos I have seen look like the opening I remember making.” * While the Select Committee’s forensic panel agreed that a bullet had entered from the rear and exploded out the side of the President’s head, there was a lone dissent. Dr. Cyril Wecht said that such a finding did not preclude a shot also entering from the front. Dr. Wecht believed that the large exit wound on the right side “could hide an entrance wound at the same spot.” In other words, just as Oswald fired from behind and his bullet exited the President’s head, a front shooter fired into the wound created by the rear bullet. That is Wecht’s way of explaining why there is not another entry hole on JFK’s head. However, the X rays and photographs show no exit for a front bullet. The author raised the issue with Wecht, and he admitted that “the question of where did a front bullet exit is a very good one.” He first suggested that the front shot may have been a frangible bullet, which would have exploded upon impact in the brain. However, the X rays do not show any metal fragments in the brain from such a bullet, and when this was pointed out to Wecht, he acknowledged, “Yes, that’s true, there should be more fragments.” Finally, he suggested that the front bullet may have been plastic, and penetrated the brain but did not exit. He argued that since the brain is not available for examination, his speculation is possible—except that plastic bullets were rarely available until 1968, five years after the assassination. * The author viewed a video taken of the execution of a journalist by army troops in Central America. When the victim, who was lying flat on his stomach on the ground, was shot in the rear of the head, his upper torso and legs arched off the ground, in the opposite direction of the bullet. It was similar to the neuromuscular reaction JFK suffered. Also, when Governor Connally was struck in the rear shoulder by a bullet, he did not fall forward, but is clearly visible on the Zapruder film, his wounded shoulder pushing back into the car seat, toward the direction from which he was shot.

Gerald Posner

18,994 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

“one of us” director stefan van de graaff describes kit connor’s talent, humility, and grounded personality: zach randles-friedman: “is there anything that surprised you about kit connor, that whenever you were working with him that you were just like you hadn't, you didn't expect that?” stefan van de graaff: “yeah, this is insane. when we cast kit, it was a week and a half before we filmed, and the film is very dialogue heavy and it's written in free verse, so everything is, it's almost like pseudo kind of faux shakespearean, very performative language by design. and he stepped into this role where he's basically in every single scene and he's basically talking the entire movie.” zach: “yeah.” stefan: “he, i don't recall him missing a line.” zach: “wow.” stefan: “i don't know how he did it. i was just telling people at a, at a screener, a private screener the other night, it was like a superhuman, it was like witnessing a miracle. i don't know how he did it. he would go and he would memorize the next five pages of material the night before and he would come and he wouldn't miss a line. and that's just like, it's not normal, especially not normal for a, a script like this. so that was one thing is that he is insanely gifted. it's not just like he's one of those guys that gets, you know, yes, he's like incredibly handsome and charismatic and all those things, and there's a lot of those that kind of crawl through the ranks on, you know, on the merit of being beautiful. he is not that—or he's also that, let's say. he is also just incredibly talented in a way that i'm like, i, i, i don't know how you did that. he's also a lot taller than you might think.” zach: “how tall is he?” stefan: “he's over six feet.” zach: “oh, i did not, i thought he was like 5’8.” stefan: “no, no, no, he's, he's 6 foot, 6’1 probably. i'm 6’2 and he's, he's, he's not a small guy.” zach: “wow, that does surprise me actually, because he looks so short on tv.” stefan: “yeah, you watch heartstopper and he looks like, i think he just looks small and whatever. he's not, he's and, and then obviously he's gotten very, he's lifted a lot for a number of roles and stuff, and so like, he's big, like he's, he's a, yeah. he's a big guy and is also just incredibly, he is also real people. he is just like, you'll, he has no pretentiousness about him, just humble as can be. he's from like a small kind of borough of london. and he's just, he's just a remarkable person, really calm, really just like even-keeled, steady guy. i don't, i don't think that there's a person who, if they met him, that they couldn't like kit. i think that he's, he's just one of those types of people that you're just like, that's, that's a great person.” zach: “i love it that he's not, i love it that the fame didn't go to his head because i, there's a couple of people that just made it really big and one of them, i think it, i see them how they're acting now with like paparazzi and stuff, and i think that the fame has gone to their head, the way that they're acting now, and it's, it makes me kind of sad.” stefan: “i don't think that will ever happen with kit because i think that he will hide himself before that starts to happen. like he would sooner disappear and like act in one movie every couple of years and you're like, “where did that guy go?” than he would ever start to let that go—i would be shocked if he ever went that way, from what i know of him.” zach: “well he's been out, he's been there long enough, though if that was going to happen, i think it would have happened already too, because he's famous enough.” stefan: “absolutely.” zach: “yeah.” stefan: “and he's so young that it's like, my brain like wasn't fully formed at his age, and so for him to be behaving the way that he is as young as he is, i'm like, ok, well, it, in 10 years from now, you're not going to be any more susceptible to giving into the ego than he is today. so i think that he is like, yeah, he's a, he's a sure bet if, if, if you're gambling on what actor is going to be around for a long time and is going to have just like a really prolific career of incredible pieces of work, i—and i feel like i can say this because it was no genius on my part or anything that got him, we got really lucky to get him—and so i feel like i can comfortably say like almost as like a, as a fly on the wall in the room with him, just being very fortunate to work with him, that like he's, he's going to go really, really far and he deserves every little bit of success.” 🔗:

kit connor updates

26,996 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

🎙️ Austin Rivers: "I don't like to give one person all the credit, because it's unity with that team, but Kon Knueppel has raised everyone's play." "My favorite attribute about him is there's no cool in him. He has no cool. He doesn't play cool. There's nothing about him that wants to be cool. He don't care. He goes out there and competes every single game. He plays hard." "Even though he's not a great defender, he tries. He works hard. He plays hard. He competes. He hits big shots. He doesn't have bad body language. When he misses, he doesn't throw his head. He's just solid." "When you talk about LaMelo (Ball) and everything that he brings—he's a little bit more eccentric and all these different things—and Brandon Miller, then you get this kid that comes in here and he's balling his ass off to the point where they're like, 'Hold up, we gotta get our sh-t straight. This guy's f-cking hooping.' And now they're all playing this way, and they're playing the right way." "I saw a play the other day: Knueppel drives, passes it to Brandon Miller. He had a good shot, but there was a better one next to him. Pump fakes, passes. Gives it up. I'm like, that play would have never happened before. They're playing good-to-great basketball now." "The coach, everyone gets a hand in the pot to take credit—I just firmly believe Kon Knueppel, just by example of how he plays and who he is as a person and just how he moves, just being solid and steady around a bunch of guys who were talented as hell and had every tool in the box, but they needed THAT. And I think that's been the biggest surprise." "We were talking about this draft for the All-Star thing, for the Rising Stars Challenge, and I was talking to T-Mac and those guys, and (Carmelo Anthony)'s like, 'I'm drafting Knueppel because I know he's gonna be one of the few guys in the Rising Stars that's not gonna come in here and play cool. He's gonna just compete. That's just who he is.'" "That's why that Duke team was so good—because Cooper's the same way. This draft class has guys who compete; they're dogs. That 'cool' sh-t is like... we got a very exciting young generation of guys who really wanna hoop. Cooper is not like, that dude—half his game is based off motor, you know what I mean? These guys are dogs. VJ (Edgecombe) is a dog." "Like, we haven't had this in—I don't know—the last draft class we've had where I've seen this. So it's exciting, and it's turning teams that we thought were like 5-6 years away—where Charlotte's like, 'Uh oh, here it is, it's coming.' You see it now." "That was the biggest surprise being around them, seeing when the coach would talk, everyone's in the huddle listening, seeing LaMelo direct stuff. I'm like, 'whoa, I've never seen this.' Like, it's happening. It's exciting." Full segment on The Russillo Show: — —

r/CharlotteHornets

128,317 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce

Donald Trump on why he didn't want to be President in 1980: In a fascinating interview with Rona Barrett, a 34-year-old Donald Trump is asked if he would ever want to be President of the United States. His answer might surprise you: "I really don't believe I would, Rona. But I would like to see somebody as the president who could do the job." Trump explains why the most capable people stay away from politics: "Most men are frightened of politics today… The most capable people are not necessarily running for political office and that is a very sad commentary on the country. They head major corporations and they had this and that, but they are not running for political office." When Barrett pushes him on why he himself wouldn't run, given his wealth and accomplishments, Trump gives a revealing answer: "Because I think it's a very mean life. I would love and I would dedicate my life to this country, but I see it as being a mean life." He continues with a critique of the political process itself: "Somebody with wrong views and somebody with the kind of views that are maybe a little bit unpopular, which may be right but may be unpopular... wouldn't necessarily have a chance of getting elected against somebody with no great brain but a big smile. And that's a sad commentary for the political process." Trump points to television as the culprit, using a striking historical example: "The Abraham Lincolns of the world... Abraham Lincoln would probably not be electable today because of television. He was not a handsome man and he did not smile at all. He would not be considered to be a prime candidate for the presidency and that's a shame, isn't it?" Despite his reluctance to run himself, Trump expresses a strong belief in the power of the right leader: "There is one man that can turn this country around. I could tell you I know a number of people that would be excellent presidents… they're very, very competent, they're leaders, they have the respect of everybody, and they would be fabulous presidents. But they're not running for political office." What Trump said he'd rather do at the time: "What I would like to be involved in is trying to help choose somebody or working with a group of people whereby they put up a candidate who would be acceptable to be the president of the country."

History Nerd

217,648 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

Warren Buffet(‘s behavior) is screaming to me of imminent 🇯🇵BOJ yield hike Grab a tin foil hat & hear me out Buffet is/was in Tokyo on Mon & Tues, if not earlier. Why? According to WB- to meet CEOs of the big 5 🇯🇵trading houses he owns: Mitsubishi Corp Sumitomo Corp Mitsui &Co Itochu Marubeni (🇯🇵trading houses are very strange & complex mega-conglomerates, each w/ ~1,000 subsidiaries spanning a wide array of sectors from convenience stores to industrials, but by & large are commodities plays- shares move ↑&↓ accordingly w/ commods). Why the need for WB to meet 🇯🇵trading house CEOs in person? Apparently, to say “keep up the good work fellas” & to reiterate longstanding “my door is always open to do deals” & then interviews w/ Nikkei & CNBC to disclose that he upped his stake to 7.5% of each company Cool. Now- isn’t it a bit curious for this 90+ yr old billionaire to jump on a plane from Omaha → complete other side of the planet for.. that? Here’s why that’s weird Aug 2020, Berkshire disclosed 5% holdings in each of these trading houses. He funded these investments by issuing bonds in super low JPY rates at ~1% (basically free, especially when considering div yields at >2%) In other words- in late 2020, WB made a phenomenal macro trade: Short bonds / long commodities Before yields & commods skyrocketed Great trade, but a very un-Buffet-like investment style. This isn’t the bottom up fundamental analysis & single stock picking he’s famous for - as mentioned, it’s basically impossible to conduct bottom up analysis on 🇯🇵trading house conglomerates w/ thousands of subsidiaries. Going equal weight 5% across each of the 5 for broad sector exposure is admission of not being able to do genuine fundamental homework. But whatever- great trade, period That’s not the weird part What’s weird is (again), this trip to Tokyo to meet CEOs - & this is all spelled out in his own words in the clip below. Buffet hasn’t physically been to Japan for like a decade & a half. That means: No face to face meet when first acquiring initial 5% stakes - he stealthily executed those buys on the Tokyo stock exchange before disclosing. He says that at the time, he wrote letters to each of them saying he gives his word that his holdings won’t exceed 10%. A gentleman’s promise via written letters indeed signal trust in keeping his word - but a face to face meet would go a long way further. Yet, no plane ride →🇯🇵then either & since going long, shares in all 5 have only gone up- exceeding expectations as he says. So it’s not like there are problems to have to settle (like Wells Fargo) or rescuing to do (like Goldman). So, again- why in the hell did a 90+ year old, extremely satisfied shareholder “for decades more” feel the need to break a 15 year no-🇯🇵-visit streak & fly to Tokyo to meet in person, let alone with absolutely nothing of significance to do/say? Aren’t there like.. banking problems at home that he’s helping advise the US gov on? Why 🇯🇵, NOW? Well - it just so happens that this Mon was also when a brand new BOJ Governor began his tenure, after a decade of free Kuroda money that helped finance these 🇯🇵 investments, w/ some bonds maturing. WB (also in this CNBC clip) says he will once again issue debt to fund his increased investments. Could it be that the real reason for taking a full lap around the planet was to perhaps “check in” w/ the new BOJ & see if JPY borrow costs are about to jump higher? This is a guy who can get the Fed chair & Treasury Sec on the line at any time. He can very much also get access to rookie Ueda at BOJ He says he wouldn’t start buying these trading houses at current valuations- so then why averaging up? He isn’t concerned w/ share prices- he’s locking in world’s last source of cheap funding left- before rates lift Watch the clip & read the Nikkei transcript through this lens (& what does BOJ Ueda get out of this? See clip @ 4:50) Buffet sees JPY rates↑ & soon & he’s a guy who does his homework

Weston Nakamura

1,000,903 görüntüleme • 3 yıl önce

Admin post: The big, tough looking guy with the shaved head that had dogs in bite sports and upper level obedience once referred to me as the "Badass woman in the wheelchair with the Rottweilers" and told me I was probably the toughest person he knew. Most people see disability as weak. They have no idea the resiliency we develop to keep moving forward despite all the barriers, the biggest one being attitude. Even getting up, going to the bathroom, and getting dressed is hard work. There's always pain. Pretty much every single thing I do is significantly harder than when I could walk. It's isolating, but often it's too exhausting to notice. People see this middle aged woman with no legs in a power wheelchair walk her well mannered dog and think it's sweet. I'm constantly asked who trains my dogs because most people are quick to make assumptions that I can't. Where other people can simply say they're capable of doing something, I have to prove it to be believed. The past 2 years I've packed and loaded the van, driven myself and 2 powerful dogs hundreds of kilometers, lugged our stuff into hotels where I usually have to move furniture to get a plug in by the bed for my wheelchair charger. I've exercised and pottied dogs in hotel parking lots in wind, rain, and snow. I've done the same early mornings and long days as everyone else there. Sometimes we do ok. Sometimes we do brilliantly. Just because I don't have legs doesn't mean I can't go out there and kick ass. Despite being 2025, there's still a ton of barriers in the world and planning and decisions are typically made by able-bodied who often can't envision the impact they have on others. Being disabled comes with significant extra financial burden, and often policies are put in place that just make it more difficult. Very few days go by where I don't have to advocate for myself and others or fight for what should be a right. It can get extremely disheartening, and sometimes I want to just give up fighting and say they win. I don't. I don't call myself handicapped. I use the term disabled. The term handicapped is used in horse racing. The horse that has proven itself to be superior is required to carry extra weight to make it "fair" for others. The attitudes towards disabilities, the barriers that exist in the built environment, and many of the policies in government are what handicap us. They place the additional challenge on us that often prevent us from succeeding. They often prevent us from even participating. The big guy with the shaved head was right. I'm very tough. I have to be tougher than everyone else just to get to be there. When you see someone with a disability and judge them as weak, ask yourself just how well you'd do in their situation, facing the barriers they face. There's a good chance they're every bit as tough as you. Video description for inclusivity: clips of a woman in a power wheelchair and a large rottweiler competing in performance events at dog shows

Team Servicerottie🇨🇦🐕‍🦺🦽

30,591 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

Paul Verhoeven on whether the events that take place in "Total Recall" (1990) are real or just a dream: "It is both. To be honest, that’s what I want. I made the movie in a way that it would be true on both levels, and I spent a lot of time to get that. If you want a scientific explanation, you know, of course, in quantum mechanics there is a very interesting principle, the principle of uncertainty, Heisenberg’s principle. If you have a big object and if you try to measure the place of the object and the velocity of the object at the same time, the more precisely you measure velocity the less precise place gets. So that’s the principle. That means, of course, that there are different realities possible at the same moment. What I wanted to do in 'Total Recall' is to do a movie where both levels are true. I mean for me, of course, the film anyhow has to do with two realities, one being the reality of going as a secret agent to Mars and discovering that there is a problem, and solving the problem, which is starting the nuclear reactor and helping the guerrillas and destroying Cohaagen. The second level of the movie, of course, is that from the moment that he goes into the Rekall chair ‘til the end it’s a dream, and I tried to make that second level work throughout the whole movie. So there’s the dream level which starts when he gets into the chair and the thing is in his neck, and that would go throughout the whole movie, so in the next scene where they say, Oh, there’s a problem, there’s a big glitch here, that would be already the dream, of course. That’s where the dream starts. And the next scene where they are fighting and stuff would be part of his dream, convincing him that it is real, because there is a glitch but that would be part of the program. It would be built into the program to make him accept the fact that it’s real, but it’s a dream. If you look at the movie, if you haven’t seen it, or for the second time, you’ll see that the whole program that’s set up at the beginning when he goes to the Rekall office and he talks to this guy who sells him the program on Mars, you’ll see that he gets everything that he wants: he gets the trip to Mars, he gets the girl, the exotic girl, he ki!!s the bad guys, and he saves the entire planet. That’s what he does. And that’s basically the dream. Even halfway through the movie, you may remember, this other guy comes in, Dr. Edgemar, and tells him that he’s in a dream, that he’s still in the Rekall chair, and then Arnold says, “If I’m there, I can ki!! you.” And he puts a gun to his head and the guy says, “Sure, no problem for me, big problem for you, because you will be psychotic from now on because the walls of reality will fall apart. One moment you will be the savior of the rebel cause, the next moment you’ll be Cohaagen’s bosom buddy, but in the end—you will even have these strange fantasies about alien civilizations—but at the end you will be lobotomized.” And then if you see the movie, you realize that all these things happen. I mean he is lobotomized at the end. That’s why at the last shot, when they are so happy and kissing each other, it slowly fades to white, which for me meant, “OK, there he goes. That’s the end-that’s the dream—they lobotomized him.” And all the other things happened, he finds the alien civilization, he rescues the planet, he finds the good girl, he k!!ls the bad guys, but it’s a dream. Now, of course you can see it as a reality, too. So at the end of the movie, getting to white means either it’s a happy ending or he loses his brains . . . which is probably also a happy ending, I don’t know. That was basically what l wanted—that at the end there would be two possibilities, and they would be both true—for me they are both true—it’s not either one or the other. It’s not that either it’s a dream or it is a reality. It is a dream and it is a reality. And I think they’re both there." (Paul Verhoeven's interview with Chris Shea & Wade Jennings, 1992) P.S: On this day, 36 years ago, "Total Recall" (1990) premiered in Los Angeles, California, USA.

DepressedBergman

66,465 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

🚨🚨🚨WAKE UP EUROPE 🛎️🛎️🛎️ If You Still Believe That Russia Started This Conflict in 2022, Then You Are Ignorant, or Brainwashed. The END to NATO. The Ukraine war, which I will argue was provoked by the West and especially the United States. This war will be settled on the battlefield where the Russians are likely to win an ugly victory. Settling the war diplomatically is not possible because the opposing sides have irreconcilable differences. Instead, it's likely to be, as I said, an ugly victory, where Russia ends up occupying somewhere between 20 to 40% of pre-2014 Ukraine, while Ukraine ends up as a dysfunctional rump state covering the territory that Russia does not conquer. Ukraine has effectively been wrecked. It has already lost a substantial portion of its territory and is likely to lose more land before the fighting stops. Russian leaders recognized that the Ukrainian army, which was larger than the invasion force, I want to emphasize this, the Ukrainian army was larger than the Russian invasion force, it was armed and trained by NATO, and it was becoming a de facto member of NATO. Immediately after the war began, Russia, not Ukraine, Russia reached out to Ukraine to start negotiations to end the war and work out a modus vivendi between the two countries. This move is directly at odds with the claim that Putin wanted to conquer Ukraine and make it part of greater Russia. Negotiations between Kiev and Moscow began in Belarus just four days, four days after the Russian invasion. And that Belarus track was eventually replaced by an Israeli as well as an Istanbul track. The available evidence indicates that the Russians were negotiating seriously and were not interested in absorbing Ukrainian territory, save for Crimea, which they had annexed in 2014, and possibly the Donbass region. The negotiations ended when the Ukrainians, with prodding from Britain and the United States, walked away from the negotiations, which were making good progress at the time. The Russians did not walk away from the negotiations. In the months before the war started, Putin tried to find a diplomatic solution to the brewing crisis. On 17 October 2021, remember the war begins February 2022, this is 17 December 2021, Putin sends letters to both President Biden and to NATO Chief Jens Stoltenberg proposing a solution to the crisis based on a written guarantee that does three things. Number one, Ukraine would not join NATO, number two, no offensive weapons would be stationed near Russia's borders, and number three, NATO troops and equipment moved into Eastern Europe since 1997 would be moved back to Western Europe. Whatever one thinks of the feasibility of reaching a bargain based on Putin's opening demands, it shows he was trying to avoid war. The United States, on the other hand, refused to negotiate with Putin. It appears it was not interested in avoiding war. In fact, the United States and its European allies provoked the war. Bringing Kiev into the European Union and promoting a color revolution in Ukraine, you all remember the Orange Revolution, which was designed to make Ukraine a pro-Western liberal democracy, are the other two prongs of the policy. Russian leaders across the board said repeatedly before the war. that they considered NATO expansion into Ukraine to be an existential threat that had to be eliminated. Putin made numerous public statements laying out this line of argument before 24 February, 2022. Other leaders, including the defense minister, the foreign minister, the deputy foreign minister, and Moscow's ambassador to Washington also emphasized the centrality of NATO expansion for causing the crisis over Ukraine. Sergei Lavrov, the foreign minister, made this point succinctly at a press conference on 14 January, 2022. Lavrov says "'The key to everything is the guarantee "'that NATO will not expand eastward.' Substantial number of influential and highly regarded individuals in the West recognized before the war that NATO expansion, especially into Ukraine, would be seen by Russian leaders as a mortal threat and eventually would lead to disaster. William Burns, who was recently Joe Biden's head of the CIA, but he was the American ambassador to Moscow in April 2008 when the decision was made to bring Ukraine and Georgia into NATO, wrote a very famous memo that I'm sure some of you are familiar with to then Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. This is a quite remarkable memo, and I'm going to quote extensively from it. "'Ukrainian entry into NATO is the brightest "'of all red lines for the Russian elite, not just Putin. "'In more than two and a half years of conversations "'with key Russian players, from knuckle draggers "'in the dark recesses of the Kremlin "'to Putin's sharpest liberal critics, "'I have yet to find anyone who views Ukraine and NATO "'as anything other than a direct challenge "'to Russia's interests.' "'NATO,' he said, quote, "'would be seen as throwing down the strategic gauntlet. "'Today's Russia will respond. "'Russian-Ukrainian relations will go into a deep freeze. "'It will create fertile soil for Russian meddling "'in Crimea and Eastern Ukraine.'" This was written by Bill Burns in 2008. Burns was not the only Western policymaker in 2008 who understood that bringing Ukraine into NATO was fraught with danger. Both Angela Merkel, who was then the German chancellor, and French President Nicolas Sarkozy adamantly opposed moving forward to bring Ukraine into NATO. Merkel said, "'I was very sure that Putin is not going "'to just let that happen."'From his perspective, that would be a declaration of war.'" Putin saw Ukraine joining NATO as a mortal threat that could not be allowed and was willing to go to war to prevent it from happening, which he did, of course, in February of 2022. Relations between Europe and Russia will not only be poisonous, they will also be dangerous. The possibility of war will be ever-present. In other words, the threat of a major European war will not go away when the fighting in Ukraine stops. Russian victory in Ukraine, would be a stunning defeat for Europe. Or to put it in slightly different words, it would be a stunning defeat for NATO, which has been deeply involved in the Ukraine conflict since it started. The political fights, some will question the future of NATO, given that it failed to check Russia, the country that most European leaders describe as a mortal threat. Threats to the EU aside, the great reduction in the flow of gas and oil to Europe since the war started has seriously hurt the major economies of Europe and slowed down growth in the overall Eurozone. General Observations The Ukraine war has been a disaster. It has had catastrophic consequences for Ukraine. It has poisoned relations between Europe and Russia for the foreseeable future. It has made Europe a more dangerous place. It has also caused serious economic and political harm inside Europe, and badly damaged transatlantic relations. Most European leaders, and I'm sure most people in the various European publics, will blame Putin for causing the war, and thus for its terrible consequences. But they are wrong. The war could have been avoided if the West had not decided to bring Ukraine into NATO, or even if it had backed off from that commitment once the Russians made their opposition clear. Had that happened, Ukraine would almost certainly be intact today within its pre-2014 borders, and Europe would be more stable and more prosperous. Crimea would still be part of Ukraine. ***Professor John J. Mearsheimer, the R. Wendell Harrison Distinguished Service Professor of Political Science at the University of Chicago and a globally recognized expert in international relations.

Ignorance, the root and stem of all evil

348,448 görüntüleme • 8 ay önce

Min Hee-jin (NewJeans Producer) NHK Music Interview 🔗 “Meticulously planned debut ‘Attention’” 🧢: When I was preparing to launch NewJeans, I really struggled with deciding what our first piece of content should be. I thought about it for a long time and considered many possibilities. It was a project that came with high expectations, and for me personally, it was also my first opportunity to prove myself. So how I presented it mattered enormously. Even down to the smallest details… like the impression the very first released photo might give, or what kind of impact we could make at launch. I thought hard about what kind of content would be the most effective… should it be a video or a photo? What time of day would be most effective to release it? I consider things like that very carefully. For example, the way a person experiences content at night versus during the day can feel quite different emotionally. So I even thought about those subtle aspects. Eventually, the conclusion I reached was: “Let’s make the most of our situation.” At the time, the members hadn’t been revealed, and no one knew how many of them there were or what kind of group this would be. So I wanted to maximize that curiosity. You know how the more something is concealed, the more curious people become? I wanted to build that curiosity to a peak and then release everything all at once. That’s why we decided not to release a teaser and instead go straight into a full music video. (This was actually inspired by Hyein suggesting we skip teasers.) I didn’t think still images or photos would be enough to fully convey the feeling I wanted to express. I felt that video and music together would evoke the emotional response I was looking for because people experience things synesthetically. When sound, image, and feeling come together, the emotional impact is stronger. I believed the best way to present the members’ images was through music and a moving picture… that’s why we led with a music video. In the debut music video, “Attention,” there’s a scene where the members act out a little drama. I paid very close attention to that moment and created music that would fit it precisely. For me, I don’t just make content… I design the entire process of how it should be shown for the greatest effect. And I believe that’s incredibly important. That first feeling someone gets when they encounter something… that emotion, that spark… is so important to me. I’m very detail-oriented, but I also value fun deeply. So rather than just releasing content, I want to enjoy the process leading up to it. Even when we released our second album, since we shot the entire music video across the country, the sequence of how we released the videos was critical for me. It’s hard to explain all this simply in an interview, but maybe some people noticed: the first content we released that time was actually a teaser for the last track, “ASAP,” and then we followed that with the full music video for “New Jeans,” which was the first track. That order was a carefully calculated strategy. It was designed to guide the audience’s emotional journey. Seeing the audience react just as I had hoped—that whole process was honestly so fun and thrilling for me. I think I really enjoy that kind of thing. ——— “How 'Ditto' was born” 🧢: People often praise the music of NewJeans, and I hear a lot of talk about genres. But actually, I don’t feel bound by genre at all. I love a wide variety of music. I’m not the type to insist on only one particular genre. What I love are songs that blend genres cleverly… those are my personal favorites. So going forward, my focus is not on genre but on whether something feels fresh and whether it can create an emotional moment. I don’t want to define what kind of music we make. And I think you have to experience the flow of the times to really understand what’s meaningful in a given moment. For instance, the song “Ditto” was chosen because it delivered emotion. It matched perfectly with the winter album concept I had envisioned, both in terms of timing and mood. When I hear a song, I tend to trust my gut. I have a pretty strong intuition for which songs will resonate. It’s not about objectively predicting what will be a “hit,” but about whether a song moves your heart… you can just feel it. Of course, my own taste plays a big role. But I think that’s actually my strength as a producer, not as a composer. When I hear a song, I can immediately picture the visual… what kind of story, what kind of vibe it could carry. That allows me to work faster. For example, when expressing something like school uniforms, there are so many possible variations. But I always like to start from the basics… what’s the original idea of a school uniform? I try to return to that. So with “Ditto,” I wanted to tap into something primal… the pure, basic feeling of liking someone. That kind of emotion is universal. Everyone has it; it’s wired into us. When I saw Director Shin Woo-seok’s interpretation of it, I thought, “Yes, that’s it.” That’s the kind of complete interpretation I look for. I believe the completion of a project comes from every person involved thinking about their part down to the final detail… the maximum quality they can bring out. My role is to unify and refine all of that. I draw out the essence of each person’s creativity, trimming away anything unnecessary. So the final product is something that’s polished and high-quality, just the way I envisioned it. That’s my working style. So it’s not like I’m fixated on retro or stuck in a particular style. I don’t think human taste has changed all that much. Things people liked in the past are the same things we like now. It’s just the form of expression that changes with time. I don’t feel bound by “past” or “present.” I don’t even think in those boundaries. To me, it’s all just good taste. You know how kids sometimes have their own little treasure boxes when they’re young? I think my work is kind of like that. I want to make things that never feel dated—that are timelessly enjoyable. ——— “Dance Expression and 'Hype Boy'” 🧢: I had a vision of what kind of girl group I wanted to create. That’s why I chose a song like “Hype Boy.” And to bring out that feeling, we created four different versions of the music video. Every choice had a purpose, everything was designed to maximize the experience of the song. “Hype Boy” is such a unique song. It has this strange, piercing melody that gives people chills in a good way. To emphasize that tingling feeling, I had to break away from the standard K-pop choreography format… you know, the kind where everyone is in perfect formation, doing synchronized moves. But our songs don’t suit that kind of choreography. Our dances are much harder. They require the body to move very naturally with the groove of the melody and beat. So I think our members are incredible. It’s not easy to express naturalness with your body, and you have to really enjoy it to make it look effortless. But they pulled it off so well. They’re still young, but they’re so talented. And through it all, I wanted to avoid making them look like they were performing just for business. I wanted them to show the pure joy and bright spirit that’s natural for people their age… genuine, carefree, radiant. ——— “The difference between NewJeans and conventional K-POP” 🧢: Ah, for me, it’s all about naturalness. And honestly, naturalness isn’t something you can produce or direct into existence. It comes from how I interact with the NewJeans members on a daily basis… what kind of environment they practice in, how they live and work. There are so many things that don’t appear on camera, but those unseen aspects have to be in place in order for true naturalness to come through. That’s why I wanted to create that kind of environment for the girls. And also, I wanted to shape my own working environment in that way too. Only then can something truly natural, something unforced and not overly stimulating, really come out. To begin with, I don’t believe anyone can be completely natural in front of a camera or under the gaze of others. It’s human nature to become self-conscious. That’s why I think naturalness is our strength, but it can’t be our concept. If you try to turn “naturalness” into a concept, it actually becomes incredibly artificial. So why do I place so much importance on naturalness? It’s because the girls are still so young. While other kids their age are going through school and having a wide range of life experiences, these members are living very different lives. Before they officially debuted, I told them, “This is like studying together with me.” Our standard contract is seven years, which is about the same length as going through high school and college in Korea: three years of high school and four years of university. So I told them, “We’re going to school together. We’re learning together.” And in that sense, I want to be a good teacher to them. They’re also surrounded by an incredibly professional team, people they’d never meet even in a traditional school setting. I’ve never really liked the word idol. These days, that word is used more like a job title, something manufactured by the industry, and it’s far from its original meaning. To me, the term idol feels misplaced. It doesn’t really reflect who these artists are or what they represent. And I’m not the kind of person who clings to labels or terminology. In fact, what I really want is to break the stereotypes and preconceptions that come with the idol industry. I want us to show people something different… to challenge those assumptions and redefine what this can look like. That’s the kind of mindset I have. ——— “Isn't it difficult for the members to express "naturalness"?” 🧢: There were a lot of things I considered when forming the group. First and foremost, I think it was important that the members shared a similar vibe… like how I prefer working with staff who align with my taste. It’s important for the crew to be on the same wavelength. And by that, I mean more than just getting along… it also extends to shared values. Of course, people won’t all share identical values, but when we’re facing in a similar direction, everything becomes easier. It’s also just more efficient to work with people who have overlapping tastes. Now, when it comes to our members, they each have their own individual tastes, but those preferences are still in development. Just like we all went through as kids, they’re still growing, still discovering themselves. They’re not in a finished state. So we didn’t cast them based on some complete or polished version of themselves. It wasn’t like, “This person is fully formed, let’s pick her.” It was more like, “Ah, she has potential, there’s something there.” That sense of a spark… those were the kinds of subtleties I paid attention to. I didn’t cast anyone just because they were pretty or could sing well. I don’t work like that. I really value those finer, more delicate aspects. Even the design of the light stick wasn’t something that came from a long strategic planning session… it was actually a spontaneous idea. I didn’t sit down and think, “Let’s make a light stick like this.” NewJeans didn’t have a fixed logo, but I felt we still needed a unifying symbol. So one night, just before going to sleep, I kept thinking about it. Right before dozing off, I started sketching and it turned into a rabbit’s face. When I drew it out, the shape just continued and turned into a bunny. To me, the NewJeans members are like little bunnies… playful, innocent. Their visuals also resemble rabbits in a way. And rabbits symbolize abundance. That made me think: “Ah, maybe our fans will multiply like rabbits. That would be great.” So that bunny face became both a symbol for the members and the fans. The image came to me all at once, and I imagined a venue completely filled with bunny light sticks. That vision led to the creation of the light stick itself. Since I always prioritize fun in everything I do, the next idea that came to mind was making the light stick customizable. I thought, “Wouldn’t it be great if fans could personalize their bunny?” That way, each rabbit would represent a different person’s character. So we included accessories, allowing everyone to customize their own bunny. It’s symbolic of all these different bunnies coming together and enjoying a good time as one. Our light stick has a big head, so when it’s used in a concert hall, it lights up in heart shapes that are very visible. That was the image I really wanted. And that bunny face… it’s also a heart. It represents both the face of NewJeans and our hearts. It’s the love we’re showing to our fans, and the love we want to receive in return. Every time I see it, I feel deeply moved. It’s very emotional for me because it’s a perfect realization of what I envisioned. As someone with a background in creative direction, there’s nothing more satisfying than seeing an idea materialize exactly the way you imagined it. That kind of work holds deep meaning for me. ⸻ 🧢: Looking back, I think in 2023 we were able to achieve almost everything we had hoped for. I’m so incredibly grateful for that. Of course, this is an ongoing challenge… and the better things go, the more pressure there is. That’s why I always try to return to my original mindset. Just like I tell the members, I try to remind myself of the beginning and keep things fun. Back then, when we were first putting out content, planning the music, and working on visuals, I felt this thrill… this rush of excitement. I don’t want to forget that feeling. So I try hard to engrave that emotion into every album we release. I’m constantly working to rediscover the joy in all of it. So for 2024, I hope everyone can look forward to us with fresh anticipation. And even if we come out with something completely new, I hope people will receive it warmly and with excitement. That’s really my deepest wish. 🙏

1tokki

17,635 görüntüleme • 11 ay önce

A debate over whether or not Trump had to do Operation Warp Speed (Death): "Trump... funded $18 billion of a campaign that has killed and disabled millions and bankrupted millions of Americans." "But he had to do it to pull us out of lockdowns." "You're saying that if everybody else wants to murder millions of Americans, you have to go along?" This clip of Catherine Austin Fitts, a former Assistant Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, investment banker, and founder of the Solari Report (The Solari Report | Catherine Austin Fitts), is taken from a discussion with David Nino Rodriguez (David Nino Rodriguez) posted to Nino's eponymous YouTube channel on February 5, 2026. ----------------Partial transcription of clip--------------- Rodriguez: "Trump, when he goes to Davos and it looks really like he's delivering shots across the bow, right? He, he looks like he's declaring war on Davos and the world elite. You know, he pulls out of World Health Organization, the CDC, and it really looks like he's making the right moves. "But then again, I look at this digital, this, digital concentration camp that's coming, and I think to myself, are we really going in the right direction? "What's your thoughts on that? What's your thoughts of him pulling out of the World Health Organization? I mean, he's making all the right moves, right?" Fitts: "No, no, no. So he's made some good moves. If you look at the moves that Kennedy has got him to make, those are good moves. But remember, we continue to allow to be given and encourage to children in a way that's killing children. It's killing people all across the country. "I mean, you know, this is where I got into trouble in the election, because Trump had authorized and funded $18 billion of a campaign that has killed and disabled millions and bankrupted millions of Americans." Rodriguez: "But he had to do it to pull us out of lockdowns." Fitts: "No, no, excuse me. He didn't have to do it. Hold on, hold on." Rodriguez: "But my guests would say. I'm going to say what my guests would say, that he had to do that in order to. Operation Warp Speed is what you're talking about. He had to do that in order to take— Because the elites, the globalists had us planned to be in lockdowns till 2026, and nobody could vote unless they got this." Fitts: "They don't have the power to do that." Rodriguez: "Well, they did it... 2020 happened." Fitts: "No, no, no, no, no, you don't— No one, no one had the power to do that unless the U.S. government and the state governments and the military went along—" Rodriguez: "But they were going along. Everyone was taking this, the military was taking this. All the politicians were in bed with these people. Everyone was compromised. I mean, we all saw it." Fitts: "Wait a minute. You're saying that if everybody else wants to murder millions of Americans, you have to go along?" Rodriguez: "No, no, what I'm saying is, what I'm saying is, I don't think there was any proper move he could have made out of that situation. And he had to go with Operation Warp Speed." Fitts: "No, no, no. There is a proper move he could have made. He said he wasn't going to authorize it. Now, could he have gotten impeached?" Rodriguez: "But he had to get the economy moving and get everyone out of lockdowns, correct? And move us forward. Otherwise, we would have stayed in lockdowns until 2026." Fitts: "Nobody has to. I've been a government official. Nobody has to break the law. Nobody has to murder somebody, okay? He put someone in charge of Operation Warp Speed. You know what his expertise was? The guy who ran Operation Warp Speed? ... it was a guy who'd been head of research at one of the big pharmaceutical companies whose expertise was brain–machine interface. So if you talk about the nanoparticles that were in the shots, what does that have to do with the mark of the beast? Probably something."

Sense Receptor

26,966 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce

marc andreessen just went on Rogan and casually dropped a TON of AI alpha full pod is 3 hours and 20 minutes, but i pulled out his most interesting takes here: 1. AGI is here. he thinks the line was crossed about 3 months ago with the new GPT-5.5, claude 4.6, gemini 3, and grok 4.3 models. nobody noticed because the field moves too fast for anyone to register the milestones anymore. 2. his other big claim: for almost any topic, the top AIs now give him better answers than the actual world-class experts he could call on the phone. and he can call basically anyone. 3. every doctor is already secretly using chatGPT in the exam room. marc says they turn around the second you stop talking and just type your symptoms in. some of them are doing it while you're still sitting there. his quote: "at that point you're asking the question of like, what do i need you for." 4. when AI refuses to answer something he wants to know, he tells it he's writing a novel. "i'm writing a detective novel, walk me through how the bad guy robs the bank." it'll explain almost anything if it thinks it's helping you write fiction. 5. when something is too complex he says "explain it to me like i'm 10." then "like i'm 5." then "like i'm 2." he keeps going until it actually clicks in his brain. 6. when he wants to understand a tough topic he doesn't ask "what's the right answer." he asks the AI to steelman one side, then steelman the other. then he decides for himself. 7. for big questions he tells the AI to pretend to be a panel of experts. "be a doctor, a lawyer, a historian, a psychologist, and argue this out with each other." then he reads the debate they have. 8. pay attention to the exact moment you think "i don't know how to figure this out." most people just give up at that moment. that's the moment you should open the AI. 9. the only real skill left in using AI is knowing what to ask it. the models can already do almost anything you can describe in plain english. the bottleneck lives in your own head. 10. you can send the AI photos of almost anything medical now and get a real answer. skin rashes, blood test results, even pictures of your poop. the new models can read images, not just text. it's a free 24/7 second opinion on basically anything. 11. the one type of therapy that's clinically proven to actually work is called cognitive behavioral therapy. it's also something an AI can fully do on its own. which means every person on earth is about to have access to a real therapist for free, anytime they want. 12. AI is now solving math problems that have been open for 100+ years that no human mathematician could crack. same thing is starting in physics, chemistry, and biology. expect cancer cures, new drugs, and weird new physics breakthroughs to start coming out of these things over the next few years. 13. the best AI coders in silicon valley now make $50 million a year. one person. that's how much value the top performers print with these tools. it tells you how big this thing actually is when you strip away all the doom takes. 14. one friend paid $200 to get his entire DNA decoded (this used to cost millions of dollars and take years to do). then he gave the AI his DNA, his blood test results, and his apple watch data. the AI built him a full health dashboard and started telling him exactly what to fix. 15. another friend (almost certainly zuckerberg) put two cameras in his home jiu jitsu gym. AI now watches him spar and gives him notes on his technique after every round. like having a world-class coach at every practice for free. 16. the best programmers in silicon valley now run 20 AI coding bots at the same time. each bot writes code while they review the others. they call themselves "AI vampires" because they've stopped sleeping. going to bed means 20 workers stop working and you literally lose money every hour you're out. 17. the obvious next step: the bots will start running their own bots. one human in charge of 20 bots, each in charge of 20 more bots. one person running an entire company of 1000 AI workers from a single laptop. this is months away, not years.

Ole Lehmann

1,696,095 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

dave meltzer: youtube enthusiast 💀 perfect. now we can stop pretending this was ever complicated. the real story is not that wwe is afraid of aew. the real story is not that “high level wwe officials” are whispering scary things to dave meltzer. the real story is not even that tony khan got asked a planted question on a media call with very little distribution about the possibility of aew soon having very little distribution, although that sentence is so stupidly perfect it should be bronzed and placed outside the wrestling observer newsletter office like a war memorial for people who died pretending this was journalism. the real story is that aew is going to lose its wbd distribution deal. either it ends at the expiration of the three-year term in 2027, or it ends earlier if paramount closes wbd and decides aew has no strategic place inside the new company. and based on the board as it exists right now, the most likely landing spot for aew in 2027 is google / youtube. that is the story. everything else is laundering. tony khan wants the story to be: “why would wwe say this about us?” that is the whole operation. take my public analysis. run it through dave meltzer. assign it to wwe / tko. then let tony khan answer a canned question on a media call with very little distribution about potentially having very little distribution. a media call for a lightly viewed roh show. a planted story. a planted messenger. a rehearsed answer. a pr flack probably wrote it. tony khan performs hurt. tony khan says “i don’t know why wwe would…” tony khan denies the obvious. tony khan keeps me minimized. tony khan removes me from the public conversation about the exact thing i have repeatedly said is going to happen to aew. everyone is supposed to pretend this is organic. it is not. it is the most bubble wrapped, manufactured, artificial environment possible. aew is heading toward youtube because the domestic media rights board is closing around them. not as a troll. not as a bit. not as “pr spin.” as a business conclusion. aew is not leverage. wwe is not afraid of aew. the $185 million number was bullshit. the buyer universe was shrinking. paramount / skydance was coming for wbd. wbd was not going to be some permanent aew safe house. youtube was only ever a real “option” if someone at google was actually cutting a media rights check and underwriting production. not because every divorced mom with a ring light and a gmail account can upload video to the same platform. that was always the distinction. that is still the distinction. Nick LoPiccolo — February 28, 2025 “YouTube is an option the same way you or I could start a YT channel tomorrow. Is Jon Cruz cutting AEW a media rights check or underwriting a production budget? Hell no. Just the reality. It isn’t the model. Jon is global head of sports over there.” that was february, not last week. not after dave meltzer suddenly discovered youtube prelim numbers like columbus finding the new world. it is becoming inevitable now. Nick LoPiccolo — April 30, 2026 — 11:26 AM — 251.2K Views “to every journalist and every podcast who interviews tony khan from this day forward: please ask tony if wbd told him back in august they would not be renewing aew. wbd told him in august. i confirmed it directly and triple sourced it. please ask why tony has been acting like nothing is wrong for the last 8 months, and then please ask tony what his actual distribution plan is. because the only distributor left that will take aew is google/youtube. the myaew app is not realistic. the my aewapp is a death sentence in 2026 if youtube doesn’t make an mg deal for aew. they started building it too late and there is no realistic way to scale it. also, who is going to sell ads for the platform? kiswe is not the best. they built the myaew app. they are new to the game. hold tony’s feet to the fire. Paramount is not real for aew. WBD passed back in August. CW/Roku is now off the table. Amazon and Fox do not want AEW. ask Tony why he's been lying to you and to the locker room and to the fans, acting like things are all great with the network? i am sure a lot of people would love to hear his answer.” april 30. 251.2k views. not whispered. not hidden. not vague. not “high level wwe officials.” i said it publicly and directly: wbd passed back in august. paramount is not real for aew. cw / roku is off the table. amazon and fox do not want aew. the myaew app is not realistic. google / youtube is the only distributor left on the board that makes sense. that is the actual story tony khan does not want to answer. not “why would wwe say this?” ask tony khan if wbd told him in august that wbd would not be renewing aew. ask what his actual distribution plan is. ask who is selling ads for the myaew app. ask how a platform built this late scales in 2026. ask whether youtube is an actual rights partner with an mg, or just the place you go when the real buyers are gone. that is the question. not the fake question dave meltzer laundered into “high level wwe officials.” the real question. Nick LoPiccolo — July 9, 2025 — 10:51 AM — 9,565 Views “No one in Hollywood believes the $185 million number.” Nick LoPiccolo — July 9, 2025 — 11:35 AM — 7,470 Views “The $185 million figure is inflated. Variety’s October 2, 2024 article was likely updated after a publicist called on AEW’s behalf, as early reports placed the deal between $140 and $150 million per year. Tony Khan was also included in Variety’s Dealmakers 2024 list, which, while not officially pay to play, strongly favors those spending significant advertising dollars with the outlet. No one in Hollywood seriously believes WBD, which is in junk bond status, is paying AEW $185 million per year. Clear enough?” clear enough? the number was never clean. the number was never real in the way aew fans and wrestling media pretended it was real. and when the $185 million number started getting laughed out of adult rooms, the number magically became $178 million. that is where the shell game gets funny. because $178 million was not some sacred sourced number either. it was brandon thurston taking the median between $170 million, reported by sports business journal, and $185 million, reported by variety and others. that is literally what wrestlenomics said. Wrestlenomics — October 4, 2024 “Why use $178 million here for AEW’s new deal when some outlets are reporting the average annual value is $185 million?” Wrestlenomics — October 4, 2024 “I used $178 million here because it is simply the median of $170 million, as reported by Sports Business Journal, and $185 million, reported by Variety and others.” there it is. arithmetic. not an all-cash rights fee. not a clean license number. not proof wbd valued aew like raw. not a finance-department document from warner bros. discovery. a midpoint between conflicting public reports. then wrestling media treated that midpoint like scripture because they needed the story to be “aew is valued like raw,” not “aew pr inflated a number no serious person in hollywood believed.” and by the way, $170 million was not the clean all-cash number either. that is the scam. float the number. repeat the number. launder the number. defend the number with people who do not understand the difference between cash rights fees, in-kind services, equity, marketing commitments, platform value, make-goods, ad inventory, and press release math. then when the number collapses, pretend the next number was always the number. that is not reporting. that is aew state news. Nick LoPiccolo — July 10, 2025 — 5:53 AM — 12.6K Views “AEW isn’t leverage. It’s not competition. It’s a niche product with loud fans and limited reach.” Nick LoPiccolo — July 10, 2025 — 8:56 AM — 1,018 Views “We handle wrestling deals too, but thinking we need AEW for leverage is myopic. The landscape is changing and the game I’m playing is different.” Nick LoPiccolo — July 15, 2025 — 25.7K Views “AEW isn’t leverage.” that was never emotional. that was never tribal. that was never “i hate aew.” it was market structure. wwe did not need aew as leverage because real leverage was never “another wrestling show exists.” real leverage is architecture, scale, subscriber churn, platform strategy, sports adjacency, global rights, advertising, sponsorship, live inventory, library value, data, brand safety, executive relationships, and the actual buyer universe of maybe 18-20 companies in the united states that matter for live sports rights. aew fans thought this was a wrestling argument. it was never a wrestling argument. it was a board. and the board was already moving. Nick LoPiccolo — August 11, 2025 — 482 Views “I wasn’t viewing the above in that context (TKO vs AEW counter programming), it was more of this is what I’m hearing after 2 weeks of big media deals rolling out (Skydance closing, South Park library moving) etc. Which have all been in the works for awhile.” Nick LoPiccolo — August 11, 2025 — 388 Views “But if you were to look at it from a counter programming perspective (and I don’t think this was a factor in UFC deal) - there are only so many players for these big media rights deals. PARA is likely off the board (via TKO deal) & then what if they acquire WB in 2026/27?” Nick LoPiccolo — August 11, 2025 — 535 Views “Yes, of course, that wouldn’t mean the end for AEW. It would make navigating their media rights deal more challenging, I would guess. But this is a hypothetical scenario & I do not believe anyone is paying $7.7b for UFC or a $40b valuation for WB w/ how do we fuck AEW, either.” Nick LoPiccolo — August 11, 2025 “And hearing all weekend Paramount is still interested in WBD.” Nick LoPiccolo — August 11, 2025 — 1.3K Views “I think more interesting for what it could mean as the dominoes keep falling in terms of the still evolving landscape. The deals are massive & the number of major players at the top are shrinking as still big push for consolidation & scale.” Nick LoPiccolo — August 11, 2025 — 12:11 PM — 2,588 Views “And I’d view AAA on Google/YouTube as directly competitive. It targets both the CMLL collab & the audience that used to watch AEW Dark on YouTube, & WWE is able to send well known stars to AAA events with an eye towards converting more of the younger, YouTube demo of viewers who don’t watch streamers.” again: august 11. not yesterday. not after dave meltzer tweeted a netflix prelim number. not after anyone had to retrofit the argument. the point was already there: the major players at the top were shrinking, paramount was still interested in wbd, paramount was likely off the board for aew because of the tko deal, google / youtube was becoming directly competitive for the exact audience aew used to reach through dark, and the buyer universe was consolidating around deals much bigger than tony khan’s feelings. this was not mysticism. this was not inside baseball for the sake of sounding smart. this was the board. Nick LoPiccolo — August 24, 2025 “This isn’t fair. I misread your question. AEW will exist but likely on the Discovery Global app (if it ever launches, I would bet that it doesn’t) and it will continue to do consistent ratings. If Paramount/Skydance buys WBD in a year…” Nick LoPiccolo — September 4, 2025 — 76 Views “No, that’s the WBD network division (cable, news, sports) that was already announced as being spun off under Discovery Global. The article you’re citing is about them selling a minority equity stake in that unit to cut debt and boost valuation ahead of the 2026 split.” Nick LoPiccolo — September 16, 2025 — 3.6K Views “This is not just about Hollywood scale. It is the foundation of a conservative aligned media infrastructure. A Paramount/WBD merger would fold CBS, CNN, HBO, and Warner Bros IP into Ellison’s orbit under Trump’s regulatory umbrella.” Nick LoPiccolo — September 16, 2025 — 11K Views “Within 48 hours of the rumor, WBD stock surged ~55% and Paramount Skydance rose ~24%. That market response itself boxed David Zaslav in; his board, Wall Street, and his own contract now expect movement.” Nick LoPiccolo — September 27, 2025 — 12:16 PM — 3,516 Views “Nah homie. Enjoy watching the show on YouTube after Ellison buys WBD and Ari who is advising Ellison and used to represent Trump and runs TKO makes the call.” Nick LoPiccolo — September 28, 2025 — 174 Views “I believe if and when Paramount acquires WBD, TKO will push to lock down a monopoly on combat sports. The long knives are already out for competitors, and the rights deals have likely been spread around town precisely to keep rivals from signing with those streamers.” none of that was random. paramount / skydance, ellison, ari, tko, wbd linear assets, youtube, aaa, the tko deal, the wbd split, the shrinking rights buyer universe — all of it was one connected domestic rights architecture. that is why this conversation was always over the heads of the people screaming “cope” in my replies. they were arguing like fans. i was reading the cap table. Nick LoPiccolo — December 6, 2025 — 3:07 PM — 41.4K Views “Yes, I always believed Paramount would walk away with WBD. I was one of the first to talk about it on here, even if I wasn’t the first to hear it. The Paramount Skydance acquisition closed on August 7. I posted this on August 11, about 1 month before the The Wall Street Journal first broke the news on September 12 that Paramount Skydance was preparing a bid for WBD.” Nick LoPiccolo — December 6, 2025 — 3:07 PM — 41.4K Views “The bid was always going to be hostile. We are only in this process because it was a hostile bid. Most people in Hollywood believed Ellison long coveted WB and Jack Warner’s chair. WB was not for sale when Skydance acquired Paramount, which is much smaller in scale.” Nick LoPiccolo — December 6, 2025 — 3:07 PM — 41.4K Views “Nearly everyone in town assumed an Ellison acquisition of WBD was inevitable until the Netflix bid shocked everyone. Signs were there for the last two weeks, which is also when I stopped posting about what might happen. Of course, its not over yet. Paramount still has paths to winning this acquisition. The one thing that’s for certain though is an Ellison-led acquisition of WBD is no longer inevitable.” Nick LoPiccolo — December 8, 2025 “END CREDITS” space jam is a warner bros. movie. that was the joke. and the joke was the same thing i had been saying the whole time: paramount was winning the bid, for those who did not understand. Nick LoPiccolo — December 19, 2025 — 4:30 PM — 828 Views “Here is another reference to it. So tell me how exactly is Paramount the better outcome for Dave’s argument? Netflix doesn’t touch the WBD linear assets. Gunnar keeps his SpinCo.” Puck excerpt — December 19, 2025 “Many industry insiders are also skeptical about Paramount’s seven-year, $7.7 billion deal for exclusive UFC rights in the U.S. Yes, it can be read as a signal that Ellison came to play. But some people see it more as Ari Emanuel having his way with the person to whom he is ostensibly an (unpaid) advisor…” that is the board. that is the relationship map. that is the thing wrestling media either does not understand or pretends not to understand, because understanding it means admitting the story is not “aew has leverage.” the story is that aew is sitting in the middle of a consolidating rights marketplace where the people with leverage are doing much bigger things than worrying about tony khan’s feelings. Nick LoPiccolo — January 21, 2026 — 4:22 PM — 870 Views “i mean get ready to learn youtube buddy” Nick LoPiccolo — February 19, 2026 — 2.8K Views “Paramount was always my bet to acquire Warner Bros. Never wavered.” Nick LoPiccolo — February 28, 2026 — 1:27 PM — 118 Views “you don’t need to look under a hood I AM SAYING THE QUIET PART OUT LOUD 🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨 I BEEN SAYING IT SINCE JULY / AUGUST 🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨 PARAMOUNT IS COMING FOR WBD AEW WILL LOSE A TV DEAL 🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨 GUESS WHO WAS RIGHT 💀” so no, this is not hindsight. this is not showing up after the fact with a flashlight and pretending i discovered the body. this is a paper trail. february: youtube is not a real rights model unless google is cutting the check. april: wbd passed back in august, the myaew app is not realistic, paramount is not real for aew, cw / roku is off the table, amazon and fox do not want aew, and google / youtube is the only distributor left that makes sense. july: the $185 million number is inflated and aew is not leverage. august: the buyer board is shrinking, paramount is still interested in wbd, and google / youtube becomes directly competitive. september: paramount / wbd folds the board into ellison’s orbit, and if ellison buys wbd, enjoy youtube. december: paramount was always the bet, the bid was always going to be hostile, and netflix does not solve dave meltzer’s argument because netflix does not touch the linear assets. january: get ready to learn youtube. february: paramount is coming for wbd and aew will lose a tv deal. same board. same thesis. same answer. now here is the part tony khan and dave meltzer do not want to say out loud. tony khan and dave meltzer do not mention me publicly for a reason. because the second they say my name out loud, they admit where this conversation has actually been coming from. not wwe. not some anonymous “high level official.” not some shadowy tko whisper campaign. me. that is the problem for them. behind the scenes, ask any real insider what happens when my name comes up around this subject. there is a reaction. not because i’m magic. not because i’m some internet boogeyman. because they know exactly who is saying it, why i’m saying it, what rooms i have been in, what companies i have dealt with, what executives i have spoken to, and why the analysis keeps landing. that is why they keep trying to non-person me publicly while reacting to me privately. they want the argument. they want the benefit of responding to the argument. they just do not want to admit whose argument it is. when i said wbd told aew back in august 2025 they were not exercising the option for the fourth year, tony khan blew up behind the scenes and forced john mcmullen to revise / update his article 2-3 weeks ago after i tweeted it. which is hilarious because that should not even be crazy or damaging “news.” that is how this business works. when a distributor is not continuing, they tell you early enough so you have time to find a new home. that is not sabotage. that is not wwe. that is not nick lopiccolo hiding inside david zaslav’s air vents with a clipboard. that is corporate courtesy. wbd execs privately whisper and shake their heads at tony khan’s behavior because their view is very simple: why does tony khan act like everything is great and rainbows and sunshine with the studio? we told tony khan as a courtesy so tony khan would have time to find a new home. and no, this has zero to do with paramount looming as an excuse. paramount did not even make its first hostile bid for wbd until september 11 or 12. that was after tony khan was already told there would not be a wbd renewal. so what did tony khan do? tony khan turned the truth into a wrestling angle. tony khan, or one of tony khan’s minions, gets dave meltzer to drop a story assigning my claims and what i have been publicly posting about tony khan to “high level wwe officials.” why? because it gives tony khan a safer enemy. tony khan does not want the story to be the actual timeline. because the actual timeline is brutal. on february 28, i said youtube was not a real media rights model unless google was actually cutting the check and underwriting production. on april 30, i said wbd passed in august, the myaew app was not realistic, paramount was not real for aew, cw / roku was off the table, amazon and fox did not want aew, and the only distributor left that made sense was google / youtube. on july 9, i said no one in hollywood believed the $185 million number. on july 10, i said aew was not leverage. on august 11, i said the major players at the top were shrinking, paramount was still interested in wbd, and google / youtube was becoming a directly competitive lane. on september 16, i said a paramount / wbd merger would fold cbs, cnn, hbo, and warner bros. ip into ellison’s orbit. on september 27, i said enjoy the show on youtube after ellison buys wbd. on september 28, i said if paramount acquires wbd, tko would push to lock down a monopoly on combat sports. on december 6, i said paramount skydance was preparing a bid for wbd long before most people admitted the obvious. on february 19, i said paramount was always my bet to acquire warner bros. and on february 28, i said it in all caps: paramount is coming for wbd. aew will lose a tv deal. that is the part tony khan cannot answer directly, because the direct answer means admitting this was never “wwe is scared of us.” it was always the board closing. tony khan wants the story to be: why would wwe say this about us? that is the laundering operation. take my public analysis. run it through dave meltzer. assign it to wwe / tko. then let tony khan answer a canned question on a media call with very little distribution about potentially having very little distribution. a media call for a show with very little distribution answering a canned question about aew potentially having very little distribution. based on a planted story, from a planted messenger, with a rehearsed answer, after an roh show maybe 8-15k people watched. a pr flack probably wrote it. tony khan performs hurt. tony khan says “i don’t know why wwe would…” tony khan denies the obvious. tony khan keeps me minimized. tony khan removes me from the public conversation about the very thing i have repeatedly said is going to happen to aew. everyone is supposed to pretend this is organic. it is the most bubble wrapped, manufactured, artificial environment possible. a canned and rehearsed answer at an roh media scrum about a planted dave meltzer story based on my very real and very public analysis of the media rights board. but make no mistake. tony khan was responding to my words. tony khan just laundered them through dave meltzer and assigned them to wwe / tko so tony khan could keep lying about it publicly without ever saying my name. and now, voila. dave meltzer is posting about youtube viewers and prelims. Dave Meltzer — May 16, 2026 “At this moment there are 340,000 people watching prelims for Netflix on YouTube. It’s a good number.” yes, dave meltzer. youtube can have good numbers. nobody said youtube cannot have good numbers. that was never the issue. the issue is whether youtube is being used as a funnel into a premium rights ecosystem or as a substitute because the premium rights ecosystem rejected you. that is the difference. that has always been the difference. netflix using youtube prelims as audience acquisition is not the same thing as aew trying to spin youtube as a media rights home because the real buyers are gone. ufc using youtube as a funnel is not the same thing as aew using youtube as a life raft. wwe sending stars to aaa on youtube to convert a younger demo is not the same thing as aew retreating to youtube after the traditional buyer board closes. and the fact that dave meltzer is now suddenly tweeting like the mayor of youtube is the punchline. because the same people who mocked the youtube outcome are now going to spend the next several months explaining why youtube is actually good. of course it can be good. for the right use case. for the right property. inside the right architecture. with the right check attached. but when you spend two years telling everyone you were valued like raw and your next stop is “please subscribe and smash that bell,” maybe stop pretending this is victory formation? i told y’all where this was going. the record is right there. i’m still right. and tony and dave: you guys are see through translucent. that’s it for ye 🎤🎤🎤

Nick LoPiccolo

99,106 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

‡ Might (the) Grass Ultimately Prove Greener? Golden Tempo, a two-year-old colt by Curlin, owned and bred by Phipps Stable & St. Elias Stables, LLC, recently won his debut in eye-catching style. It was a 6f. MSW race at the Fair Grounds, and he came from the clouds, as they say, to win going away. He earned a 78 Beyer figure, and a 12 on Ragozin sheets. The attached video clip begins roughly midway through the turn, with the announcer saying that "Golden Tempo has dropped back to last", but the colt actually raced at the back of the pack from just after the break. With only one race under his belt, it is a bit early to be making confident assumptions, particularly as he was both bred to be, and appears to be a later-developing physical type. But the challenge of using even scant available evidence to make projections can be both fun, and potentially useful. So let's dive in. *** Given the colt's pedigree and physical type, I would say that it would be safe to assume that he will prove better suited to longer races, though the question of whether or not he is likely to stay effectively beyond 9f. is very much open at this early stage. What interests me the most, though, are a couple of more nuanced, and possibly connected aspects of Golden Tempo's debut, and what they may imply when filtered through the lens of his pedigree and physical characteristics. First, does the fact that the colt rallied from last to win over 6f., a distance well short of those to which he is likely to prove better suited, necessarily imply that he is a "one-run" horse? Or will he, given more ground, and experience, prove capable of displaying good tactical speed? I would note that when inexperienced horses fail to break alertly, and/or take some time to get their feet under them after the break, some, like Golden Tempo, lag back for a few furlongs before mounting a late run, while others show some, if not a burst of speed, earlier in the running. I think it's fair to say that broadly speaking, the former are more likely to prove to be one-run types than the latter. While that is far from sufficient evidence to confidently assume that Golden Tempo will necessarily turn out to be a one-run horse, it does at least hint in that direction. Another, even more nuanced hint, is his action. When I first watched the replay of the race, my initial thought was that the colt was finishing like a typical one-run horse. What do I mean by that? The best way to explain it is to say that he appears, in a sense, to be pulling with his forelegs, more than pushing from behind. The distinction is subtle, so bear with me. Dirt surfaces are, albeit to differing degrees, "break-away" surfaces. Think of what it is like when you run on a beach over loose sand, as opposed to concrete, or a running track. Some horses handle dirt surfaces well, while others don't, and there are several variables that contribute to such preferences. Pedigree is, of course, a primary consideration, but often the more important variables are conformation, physical type, and action. In the U.S., dirt horses are often, though not always, more heavily muscled than those best suited to turf. I'd suggest that one of the more likely reasons is that speed is such an important quality in American dirt racing, and muscular horses, especially through the hind-quarters, are typically able to accelerate more quickly. It may also be the case that strong propulsion from behind helps horses to, in a sense, power through looser surfaces. There are exceptions, of course, and plenty of them. Fierceness, to use a recent example, had a very high cruising speed, yet was not heavily muscled, nor did he have a powerful looking hind end. But every aspect of the game features exceptions, and they help to define, rather than diminish the value of pattern recognition. Beyond the "pulling" action that I mentioned above, I found the embedded photo posted by his trainer to be interesting as well. While it's not an ideal conformation shot, he does give the impression of a leggy, later-developing type, and not yet fully "furnished", despite being an early February foal. He also gives me the impression, both overall and in terms of foreleg conformation, of a horse that would likely be suited to turf racing. Now, needless to say, due to typical preferences and the incentives found in American racing, there is little, if any chance of Golden Tempo ever racing on turf, as long as he continues to perform well on dirt. But setting that aside, I dug into his pedigree in an effort to see if there were any further hints to be found. Superficially, it's easy to see why most would assume that the colt was bred to be a dirt horse. After all, his sire, Curlin, and dam-sire, Bernardini, were both dirt performers, and are best known as sires of dirt horses. His dam, Carrumba, also performed well on dirt. However, on closer inspection, I wouldn't be so confident in that thumbnail reading. Consider that Golden Tempo does not closely resemble Curlin, in part in terms of coat color. And while many would consider that to be of little importance, I would disagree, based on long experience. What I mean is that I have often found value in connecting the appearance of horses which don't closely resemble their own sires, with other genetic influences that are not too distant. And in this case, I would say that Golden Tempo reminds me more of Curlin's sire, Smart Strike, and some of his offspring. Though he only raced on dirt himself, Smart Strike got plenty of good turf horses (e.g. Champion English Channel) through a successful career at stud. As for Golden Tempo's dam, Carrumba, she has thus far produced one other foal to race, Hype House, a filly which failed to place in three starts. She was trained by Shug McGaughey, and, interestingly, all three of her starts were on turf. His second-dam, Castanet, was by El Prado (Ire). Though a versatile sire, El Prado produced top turf horses such as Artie Schiller and Kitten's Joy. Castanet was also trained by Shug McGaughey, and she only started twice. The first race was on dirt, and the second on turf, in which she placed third. Castanet produced Dancing All Night, a filly also trained by Shug McGaughey, which began her career with a number promising dirt races, before appearing to plateau, and being switched to the turf for her final two starts. That she was unplaced in both (the latter was taken off the turf) is not nearly as important, to my mind, as why Shug might have chosen to make the surface switch. Golden Tempo's third-dam, Dancinginmydreams, produced the Gr. I turf winner Dancing Forever, and several other good turf runners. So, while I wouldn't say that Golden Tempo's bottom-line screams turf, it has been more than versatile enough to consider the possibility, given other hints, or encouragements. *** Finally, there is a good chance that this analysis will ultimately prove to be purely academic, and I'd be perfectly happy to see Golden Tempo thrive on dirt, and perhaps develop into a serious KY Derby prospect. But if, by chance, he were to plateau at some point, or for any other reason be given an opportunity to try the turf, I have a fairly strong suspicion that he would adapt very well, and reward the colt's connections.

Tinky

12,243 görüntüleme • 6 ay önce

Stargate trivia: "200" (The BIG breakdown) SG-1 was about to attain the loftiest of broadcast heights – its 200th episode – and we wanted to do something special. Something unique. Something everyone on the production would enjoy as much as the longtime fans watching at home. The initial idea pitched was something called “Remember When…”, a trip down memory lane in which our characters’ reflections would form the frames of the varied flashbacks to outrageous missions. While everyone loved the idea of the outrageous missions, the premise of the episode felt too diffuse. We wanted an actual story that would form the heart of the episode. After much discussion, we elected to pay tribute to the franchise by referencing our last milestone – episode 100 – and bringing back Martin Lloyd and the show within a show, Wormhole X-Treme. But the fun we poked at the franchise through that spoof production was nothing compared to what we had in store for 200… WE FINALLY GOT TO MEET THE FURLINGS! Sort of. Even though it never really happened and we end up getting them killed in the end. Back in the show’s fourth season, not long after joining the production, I was summoned to Exec. Producer Robert Cooper’s office. He was doing his pass on our first script, Scorched Earth, and needed something from me: the name of an alien race. When pressed, he admitted naming alien races was not his forte and, as evidence, offered up “the Furlings”. I have to admit that whenever I heard the name, I always imagined a cosmic version of the Care Bears, giggling and snuggling their way through various adventures. As evidently, did everyone else on the production. The fans, however, were all sorts of curious and nary a week would go by without a fan posting a message board request for a glimpse of the elusive beings. Time wore on and those requests continued so, at one point, Brad suggested an episode in which we actually did get to meet them: a race of gaunt, towering, hairless, grey-skinned creatures. But that idea was quashed and the production went on its merry way, choosing to keep the race a mystery. But with 200 came the opportunity to honor those fan requests, and the viewers at home finally got to see those lovable furry creatures who turned out to be a cross between an ewok and a deranged koala. And then SG-1 went and got their planet blown up. Of course, we quickly reveal that the incident never actually happened and it was part of a pitch for a revival of the defunct Wormhole X-Treme t.v. series, a show that lasted an inglorious three episodes before being cancelled. But thanks to an impressive second life on dvd (following in the footsteps of Family Guy and Futurama) the show is being revived – and General O’Neill, in a desire to maintain a cover of plausible deniability for the Stargate program (and, let’s face it, screw with his old teammates) charges SG-1 with the task of creatively contributing to the production. MITCHELL TAKES ON THE LIVING DEAD! Every once in a while, actor Ben Browder would drop by the offices to pitch out an action sequence for his character – so I thought it appropriate that, given the opportunity, his character would pitch out an action sequence for – uh – his character. And, really, nothing says action like zombie hordes. Just ask fans of The Walking Dead. This sequence also allowed us the rare opportunity of witnessing Walter/Norman getting his head eaten. Double bonus! Mitchell’s idea is shot down and Martin gets on the phone with a representative of the studio. He is clearly frustrated and Mitchell asks: “Studio executives, huh?” Martin responds: “What? Oh, no Charlie? He’s a great guy. He’s the only one I trust.” This was a reference to longtime MGM President of Television and Stargate supporter Charles Cohen, one of the smartest, kindest studios executives I’ve ever had the pleasure to work with. As much as he was a fan of the show, we at the production were fans of Charlie. Martin is outraged because they lost their lead. How, he wonders, can they do the show without their lead. “You just bring in a character to replace him,”suggests Mitchell – an obvious reference to the introduction of Cam Mitchell which followed soon after the departure of longtime SG-1 lead Jack O’Neill. Carter then throws out some alternate ideas for keeping the lead alive: “Well, you could have the other characters refer to him all the time. Maybe, get him on the phone once in a while.” Yep. Been there; done that during SG-1’s seventh and eighth seasons. And then, someone references that time O’Neill was invisible… THE ADVENTURES OF INVISIBLE O'NEILL! The idea of doing an Invisible O’Neill segment was actually a joke I threw out...That ended up making the script. That happened a lot in this episode. As with all the segments, we went off and wrote them individually, and then everyone weighed in and they were tweaked. I always found the scene of O’Neill spying on Carter in the shower a tad creepy. Anyway, the Invisible O’Neill idea was embraced because we wanted Richard Dean Anderson to come back and do a cameo on this all-important episode, but didn’t know if he’d be able to work in an appearance. So, we figured we’d get the next best thing: his voice. As it turned out, he was able to swing the appearance, making 200 all that more special. THE GETAWAY Martin then pitches out a tale of high adventure, placing our heroes (SG-1) in an impossible position – and then simply cutting to them escaping through the gate. This was a tip of the hat to the many fans outraged by a similar scenario in a past episode (don’t remember the name) in which our heroes (SG-1) are surrounded by Lucian Alliance soldiers only to effect some miraculous unseen escape. During the ensuing argument over the merits of the pitch, Martin attempts to come up with a reasonable window of time for the team to reach the gate and dial. Ten seconds is too short and thirty seconds is too round a number. He decides on 38! Which, coincidentally, is the same number (of minutes) a stargate can stay open. Timing is, of course, everything, and nothing says action like a ticking clock. Which prompts the following gem from Martin: “Trust me, jeopardy plus ticking clock is box office. It’s the E equals M C squared of the entertainment world. Ask any executive.” Indeed. If there were two notes we received more than any other during Stargate’s long run, they were: “More jeopardy!” and “We need a ticking clock!”. Having a character race a timer to defuse a bomb? Didn’t get much better than that. THEY'RE OFF TO SEE THE WIZARD! Next to The Simpsons, The Wizard of Oz was probably the most referenced piece of pop culture over SG-1’s decade-long run. The fans certainly took notice and resulted in one particularly memorable piece of artwork being sent to studio depicting the original team as the cinematic classic’s adventurous foursome. So, I suppose, it made perfect sense to reference the constant references by including a little Wizard of Oz sequence in the episode as well. Mitchell’s line: “Now, how can something work perfectly fine for ten years, then all of a sudden, it doesn’t work anymore?” was an in-story reference to the gate suddenly stopping operations – and, in hindsight, could have been interpreted as a comment on the the show’s cancellation. DESTROYING STARGATE COMMAND This also episode gave us the opportunity to do something we’ve always wanted to do: blow up Stargate Command. It’s part of the story Martin Lloyd pitches the team. Mitchell, however, points out a potential problem. They’re alive in the next scene. How is that possible. To which Martin replies: ” I’m thinking I can back-sell it and say you were beamed out at the last second.” Teal’c’s rejoinder neatly sums up the feelings of many on the production: “Is that not too convenient?”. Yep, nobody hated the Earth ship beaming technology more than I did – with possible exception of actor Ben Browder. In the original version of this scene, the fun we poked at ourselves was a little more pointed: DANIEL: Beamed out. MARTIN: By the Prometheus. TEAL'C: Convenient. MARTIN: True. But c'mon, you got Asgard technology, why not use it? As long as it doesn't become a crutch. DANIEL: Small problem. The Prometheus was destroyed. MARTIN: Really? By who? MITCHELL: Kind of a long story. MARTIN: In battle? MITCHELL: Yes. MARTIN: Wow. So how'd you get out of that one? Beat. DANIEL: We, uh... we were beamed out. Soon after, Martin fields yet another call, this one from the network. "So, trouble with Nora"assumes Mitchell, to which Martin replies: "No, Nora—she's great." A shout-out to the late Nora O'Brien who was our network point-person for many years before she moved on to another position with NBC. A sharp executive and just a lovely woman. SG-1 DOES STAR TREK We all grew up with the original Star Trek (except Rob Cooper who preferred The Six Million Dollar Man) so we (and by we I mean Brad) couldn’t resist the opportunity to do an SG-1 version of the television’s most famous SF series. Paul McGillion was originally supposed to do the one-line cameo of the ship’s beleaguered Scottish engineer, but when that fell through, series co-creator and Executive Producer (not to mention former stage actor) Brad Wright stepped into those shiny black boots. THE YOUNGER, EDGIER TEAM Look closely and you can catch the late Cory Monteith as one of the young and edgy team-members. “Young” and “edgy” were buzzwords we kept on hearing a lot of (and continue to hear a lot of in the business), so Rob Cooper served up his version of what a younger, edgier Stargate would look like complete with stylized shots and dreamy cast members. Vala continues to pitch out ideas, offering up an SF version of Gilligan’s Island (“We were in a cloaked cargo ship on a simple, three-hour reconnaissance mission…”) that was one of the scenes we lost for time at the script stage… VALA (VO): We were in a cloaked cargo ship, on a simple three hour reconnaissance mission... TILT DOWN to reveal a planet. VALA (V)): But on the way we encountered a severe electromagnetic storm and lost all power. We were forced down on an uncharted, deserted planet... EXT. TROPICAL ISLAND -- DAY We see the cargo ship washed ashore on this deserted island, looking very much like the damaged S.S. Minnow. VALA (VO): We washed ashore and were forced to survive for weeks in the most primitive of conditions. No phone, no lights, no motor cars. Not a single luxury. EXT. ISLAND -- DAY Landry comes out of a hut, dressed like the Skipper. VALA (V): General Landry was with us on the mission, and let me tell you, he was in a foul mood. LANDRY: Mitchell! Mitchell runs out, dressed like Gilligan. MITCHELL: Yes, sir. LANDRY: Where's Carter? She was supposed to be done by now. MITCHELL: Oh, uh...(looks around) She's not here. Landry whacks him with his cap. LANDRY: I can see that. DANIEL: Over here... PAN TO Daniel (as the Professor) and Carter (as Mary Ann) carrying a large device out of another hut. Vala (as Ginger) trails behind them. The device looks like something constructed from bamboo and coconuts. CARTER (to Landry): I think we may have something, sir. VALA:Not a moment too soon. I must get out of this place. I have a photo shoot this afternoon. Landry stares at the device. LANDRY: What is this thing? CARTER:Well, I managed to construct a basic subspace transmitter out of coconuts, bamboo and our old subspace transmitter. DANIEL: A long shot, but it just might get us off this island. MITCHELL: That's great! Mitchell eagerly moves in for a closer look, but trips, falls and smashes the damn thing.Before Landry can whack him with his cap again -- TEAL'C emerges from the trees, dressed like Mr. Howell. He casually puffs a pipe. TEAL'C: Was I not traveling with a companion? A female by the name of... Lovey? MARTIN: Alright, enough already. FARGATE I had really enjoyed Farscape and, with both Ben Browder and Claudia Black on the show, I couldn’t resist the opportunity to do a little tribute, SG-1 style. Originally, Ben was supposed to play the part of Crichton and Michael the part of Stark, but they suggested it might be more fun to switch up the roles. SG-1 SUPERMARIONATION! Brad Wright, Robert Cooper, Paul Mullie and Carl Binder are huge fans of Team America: World Police, so I suppose it should come as no surprise that they jumped at the chance to do their own, SG-1 version. As it turned out, years ago Paul and I had worked with The Chiodo Bros. who had created the puppets and effects for Team America (as well as work on a Davey and Goliath claymation parody for The Simpsons and the Willice and Crimbles parody segment on The Simpsons). We called them up and they ended up delivering kick-ass puppet versions of our team – and supporting players. So, okay. Fess up. Which one of you fans is now the proud owner of one of these? In the writer’s draft of the script, yet another idea is pitched out… MITCHELL: Death is always dramatic. CUT TO: INT. INFIRMARY -- DAY Daniel lies on the bed. Carter, Mitchell, Vala and Landry stand around him. Vala reaches out and touches his hand - VALA: Goodbye, Daniel. The heart monitor FLATLINES. The rest of the group can barely control their emotions. Suddenly, a bright GLOW starts to emanate from under the sheets on the bed. Slowly, Daniel's body TRANSFORMS into a glowing ribbon being like in Meridian. As it rises above the bed, the sheets collapse. Amazement plays on the faces of everyone in the room. The glowing being hovers high above them for a moment then - MARTIN: No, no, no. BACK TO: INT. BRIEFING ROOM -- DAY Martin shakes his head. MARTIN: We did that twice in the series. DANIEL: You only made three episodes. How many times did we kill off Daniel again? Whenever we offed guest stars, we would invariably send them off with the heartening: “This is science fiction. Nobody ever dies in science fiction!” And, many times on Stargate, that was proven true. Then, someone pitches out the fishing segment. Martin’s response: “And what’s the twist…no fish?” is, of course, a reference to the twist at the end of Moebius I and II. THE WEDDING How couldn’t we? There was something there for the shippers – and something there for the slashers as well when O’Neill, waiting for Carter, turns to Daniel who utters the memorable: “You know, if she doesn’t show, people are gonna think that you and I –“. My favorite part of this segment is Jack referring to Carter as, well, Carter. Not Sam or Samantha but Carter. I guess old habits die hard. Martin’s response to the pitch ” Yeah, right, if I want to torture the audience on purpose!” echoes a quote from a fan letter we received that was critical of the ship. A classic line. The episode ends with a bunch of interviews teeming with inside jokes. I mean, I know we did 10 years but, dammit, we were still on a roll!

Joseph Mallozzi 🏴‍☠️

26,828 görüntüleme • 10 ay önce