Загрузка видео...
Не удалось загрузить видео
👵🏻 with D1 large NET. Not a good surgical candidate. Endoscopic resection done with Full Thickness Resection Device (FTRD) 💪🏼 👀 at the path 👇🏼 with -ve margins Great team Resheed Alkhiari رشيد الخياري د.عبدالله العريني| Abdullah Aloraini @taldoheyan_ 👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼 المدينة الطبية الجامعية more to come! 💪🏼⏳
14,227 просмотров • 1 год назад •via X (Twitter)
Комментарии: 2
د.عبدالله العريني| Abdullah Aloraini1 год назад
@Ralkhiari @taldoheyan_ @ksumedicalcity Well done team @DrAmmarAlotaibi @Ralkhiari 👍🏼
Dr Nahla Azzam1 год назад
@Ralkhiari @draloraini @taldoheyan_ @ksumedicalcity Great job and great teamwork
![HYBE and Min Hee-jin NewJeans Controversy from the Perspective of a 20-Year Entertainment Industry Expert | Kim Yoon-ji, Senior Researcher at the Overseas Economic Research Institute of the Export-Import Bank of Korea #1 [Investment Insight] 증시각도기TV HYBE has shown a somewhat immature side throughout this process. The essence of the issue has become less important. Hello, viewers and investors of Stock TV. Recently, there has been a lot of societal concern about the entertainment industry. Last year, it did well, but the question remains about how it will fare this year. We’re joined by Kim Yoon-ji, Senior Researcher at the Korea Eximbank Overseas Economic Research Institute, to discuss this. Welcome. Today, I brought a drink because this topic is not easy to discuss soberly. The situation between HYBE, Min Hee-jin, and NewJeans has escalated, and unfortunately, it’s no longer just management fighting but the artists have joined the fray. I’ve heard from someone in the industry that the close relationship between a producer and an artist is inevitable. In the past, there have been similar cases where producers and artists were tightly knit. Now, something similar has happened with Min Hee-jin and HYBE. Most people outside the industry don’t know the exact terms of the contract between Min Hee-jin and HYBE. As my own son works in the entertainment field, I’m well aware of how important it is to work with a good producer. For a company like HYBE, which has invested tens or even hundreds of billions of won, it’s unthinkable that they would allow NewJeans to separate and go independent after establishing their position. Many in the industry agree that this doesn’t make sense. To the general public, NewJeans might seem like the underdogs, and people might feel they should be allowed to leave. But from the perspective of the entertainment industry, which requires substantial capital to grow, the relationship between investors and artists is key. You can’t discuss this industry without acknowledging the role of investors. This case is different from situations where individual members leave, as seen in the past with groups that had Chinese members. This isn’t about a single member leaving; it’s more about the fact that, in this industry, the producers are as important as the artists themselves. From the beginning, NewJeans has been marketed as Min Hee-jin’s girl group, so the idea of them continuing without her feels different. We need to approach this from a different angle. That said, it doesn’t mean HYBE should completely cut ties. Many people have different initial thoughts about the situation, but the core issue here is the importance of the relationship between producers and the company, especially when substantial investment is involved. From my perspective, the fundamental question is: what exactly was attempted? I still find this unclear. In any company, it's common to hear people say, "I want to quit, I can't work with this boss, I'm leaving tomorrow." We all talk about this with friends or colleagues. Sometimes, we even ask others to let us know if there’s a good opportunity elsewhere. But actually submitting a resignation is a whole different issue. But in the new premise, I still wonder what exactly they were trying to do. What exactly was attempted? We always talk about it at work, right? "I'm going to quit. I can't work with that boss anymore. I'm leaving tomorrow." We always have those conversations. We talk about it with our friends, with team members, and even ask friends outside of work to let us know if they hear of any good positions. But actually submitting a resignation is a whole different issue, isn't it? Looking at how the situation first unfolded, it seems like HYBE was the one to bring things to light. They shared a lot with the press, and Min Hee-jin, the CEO, responded with a strong counterstatement. HYBE was saying, "Min Hee-jin is trying to do this and that," but CEO Min was like, "What else have I done apart from that message on KakaoTalk?" The court also judged that they weren't sure what actions had actually been attempted. To me, this seems like the fact of the matter. Clearly, HYBE's relationship with CEO Min Hee-jin might not be good. There could have been friction about how a subsidiary operates so independently from the parent company. There were likely various issues internally, but they should have been resolved within the company without making the problems visible externally. The fact that they let it spill outside before resolving it was a huge mistake on HYBE's part, revealing weaknesses in their management abilities. In my view, this has greatly devalued HYBE, becoming a powerful force that has dragged down their valuation. Throughout this process, HYBE displayed a level of immaturity, and the core of the issue became less important. The real concern for investors now is whether the company can effectively handle issues like these. Once this problem is resolved, can the remaining HYBE groups continue to grow securely? This business is all about reputation. HYBE is now seen as a company that ousts female CEOs simply because she didn't follow their orders. That perception leaves a lasting impression on people's minds, damaging the company's future operations. From an investor's perspective, two major incidents have happened in quick succession. The first was the boost in value during 2020 when HYBE sold a huge number of albums during COVID-19, creating the sense that the entertainment industry was Korea's next big sector. But then, this recent issue with Min Hee-jin, alongside BLACKPINK's contract situation, has put a serious damper on things. BLACKPINK didn't renew their contract as a group, and though they claim to continue working together in some capacity, it's not the same as before. YG Entertainment's profitability has plummeted, revealing how dependent they were on BLACKPINK. This has left investors wondering whether the entertainment business is just a limited-time, seven-year affair. If BLACKPINK had carried on smoothly into the next generation, it would have seemed like a sustainable business, and investors would have continued to trust in the long-term future of Korean entertainment. But now, we're seeing the cracks in that perception. It’s become a question of how to invest in a business with a lifespan of only seven years, when even the manufacturing industry lasts longer than that. The BLACKPINK incident and the NewJeans situation have both severely harmed investor confidence. HYBE's struggles with its artists are analogous to a manufacturing company facing a revolt from its workers. When investors look at this instability, they start questioning whether the business is even viable. The concept of sustainability has been seriously undermined, and the fact that the seven-year contract issue has been a long-standing concern doesn’t make it any easier to deal with. What used to reassure investors was the belief that when a seven-year contract ended, the company would already have the next seven years planned out, ready to sustain their business. That faith in the big entertainment companies has been shaken. Achieving the kind of success that BTS or BLACKPINK did is incredibly difficult, and passing the baton to the next generation is no simple task. Even though investors had faith that YG would produce another BLACKPINK-level group, now that trust is faltering. However, I do think people are now looking at contracts a bit differently. In the past, when a group disbanded, the members would scatter. But now, groups like BLACKPINK continue to work together even while pursuing solo projects. This shows that they understand the importance of sticking together, and I thought that this might help extend the longevity of these groups. But in reality, very few cases of disbanded groups have seen much success with individual members pursuing separate careers. There aren’t many examples where groups have stayed active for long, especially when individual members run into personal issues. Take Big Bang, for instance—they’ve been around for a while, but their personal scandals have made it hard for the group to recover fully. In the entertainment business, it’s rare for groups to last more than seven years, and age is also a factor. Once a group surpasses the seven-year mark, the members tend to be quite a bit older. With BTS, they need to show a fresh side if they’re to keep running strong. One of the most disheartening things mentioned by the members was that they didn’t feel respected. This ties into a larger issue in our society, as we're seeing with the national discussion around workplace bullying. If we think about how BTS achieved success, it's clear why this is such a serious issue. Back when BTS rose to fame, they shared how they weren’t from one of the top three agencies and positioned themselves as underdogs who worked hard to gain recognition. This resonated with many young people who felt that if you work hard enough, you can succeed, even without the backing of a major company. This message gave hope to many, not only in Korea but also globally. BTS’s fan base, especially in the U.S., includes many people who identify as outsiders, those who don’t feel they belong to the mainstream—whether in terms of race, culture, or social standing. For them, BTS was a source of inspiration, showing that you can still succeed even if you start from the margins. With NewJeans, though there’s talk about Min Hee-jin, the allegations of bullying within the company are hitting a sensitive nerve for fans. It’s unfortunate that the company allowed things to reach a point where such accusations were made. Even if the situation was mostly an internal conflict among the adults in charge, they should have handled it better to avoid involving the artists. In the past, we've seen similar issues, like with Big Bang’s various scandals, which were almost at the level of criminal activity. The current situation with NewJeans might not be as severe, but bullying and exclusion are still serious concerns. Ultimately, experiences like these can serve as valuable lessons for the entertainment industry. This situation has highlighted that the entertainment business is fundamentally about human relationships. From the artists to the products they create, everything revolves around people. The moment someone’s feelings are hurt or relationships are damaged, the entire business can collapse. The entertainment business is all about personal connections, something I've always believed. Recently, I heard about Naver Webtoon’s global success, and it's fascinating to think about how it has outgrown Kakao Webtoon, despite being a later player. Many factors contributed to this success, but someone mentioned that webtoons are also a "personal connection" business. Webtoon creators are tough to manage—they're artists, after all, and keeping them on schedule, especially with weekly deadlines, is a challenging task. CEO Kim Joong has managed to nurture relationships with these creators, making personal connections the backbone of the business. In the entertainment industry, particularly with idols, you can't overlook the importance of personal relationships. The key skill for managing this industry is the ability to connect deeply with both the creators and the artists. HYBE, for instance, doesn’t just need skilled managers who are good with finance or operations. What they truly need are people who can foster those personal relationships, especially when they’re dealing with artists as young as 13 or 15. It’s about ensuring that these young talents feel understood and cared for, so they can be inspired to do their best work. Managing young artists is tricky because their idea of success might be completely different from what adults think. A 13-year-old might not care about owning multiple houses—they might just want to spend time with their family or have the freedom to eat out whenever they want. The manager’s job is to tap into what motivates them and help them thrive in a way that’s meaningful to them. This kind of nurturing is not easy to scale. When a company grows too big, it’s challenging to maintain those close relationships. That's why multi-label approaches, like those seen in large entertainment agencies, are supposed to help. But if personal connections within those labels break down, the whole system can fall apart. This business model seems uniquely suited to Korea. It’s hard to imagine it working the same way in Japan, where there's a more hierarchical, command-driven structure. Japan's entertainment industry often depends on strong, central producers who direct everything. In contrast, Korean idols often rise through collective effort and personal connection, like BTS did. Despite the challenges, I believe Korea’s entertainment sector has room for long-term growth. Many of today’s youth are drawn to this field because it allows them to express their talents and passions. If scandals like the one with NewJeans continue to arise, however, it might dissuade some young people from pursuing these dreams. When you look at what NewJeans members have said, there’s not much to disagree with. They simply want to keep doing what they’ve always done and follow their own creative paths. Ensuring they have the freedom to do so can lead to even greater success. These days, if you ask middle or elementary school students what they want to be when they grow up, many of them will say they want to become idols or YouTubers. They believe that with enough effort, they can make it. The entertainment industry needs to be able to channel that passion and potential into something positive. If Min Hee-jin were to leave HYBE, it’s clear that many companies would be eager to work with her. She mentioned once that “everyone is crazy about money,” and I think that’s why there would be a long line of people wanting to meet with her if she decided to move on. Right now, for example, there are people in the entertainment industry, like CJ, who may not have fully established themselves, or even private investors, just waiting for an opportunity. Many of them are keeping an eye on Min Hee-jin leaving HYBE. This was evident during the recent Tokyo performance, where her creativity was on full display. It was incomparable. That’s why this situation is even more unfortunate. Some people say, "If it wasn’t for the money, how could that group have been created?" But I believe there are people who could have made it happen with or without money. That’s the crucial difference in this case. While I'm not an expert, I was touched by the process of recreating a hit song from a legendary Japanese female singer from the '80s. It felt like a major event. It was amazing because I had never seen anything like it before. Even though I wasn’t familiar with the original song, just seeing it was enough to draw in so much attention and make it feel like a historic moment. That’s what talent is—turning something simple, like a cover song, into a major event. I remember thinking, "How do the Japanese people feel about this?" because the crowd's reaction was incredible. The enthusiasm was surprising, and I wondered what they were thinking while watching it. This is the true power of Korean culture—it’s not just about promoting our own culture but also deeply resonating with others. The entertainment industry’s core business is making audiences happy and even obsessed. Min Hee-jin is undeniably a top-tier artist in this field. If she were to leave HYBE, there would be countless opportunities for her. But if HYBE mishandles this situation, it won’t just be about losing one person—it could destabilize everything. They really need to handle this carefully. As for stocks and investments, that's up to everyone’s individual decisions. We're just having a casual chat here about the entertainment industry. As someone with a child in the business and another who's analyzed the industry, we’re just relaxing with a casual discussion. So, let’s pour a drink and enjoy this conversation. Watch the full video:](https://image.24vids.com/tw-1842046662933610609/amplify_video_thumb/1842042079117246465/img/At1wmSEbkseQtgQZ.jpg)
!["Triangles are a result of reverse engineering and sometimes piloted by 'them' and other times piloted by 'us AND them.'" 👽🤝👨🏻 Agreements, and Humans Working Alongside Non-Humans? 🛸▽👽 (This is relatively interesting, and I think you guys are going to like it. It's a little bit long. First, Matt on with Jesse and the clip below.) Matthew Brown (Matthew): "At this point in time, it's possible that, you know, the United States and others have some sort of derivative technology that looks like the big, black triangle, right? There's that famous NIDS study done in the, I think, late '90s or early 2000s where they correlate triangle sightings to naval bases in the United States." ~Lacatski!~ (I can't write about triangles without including the words of Dr. James Lacatski on Weaponized, with George Knapp and Jeremy Kenyon Lockyer Corbell. Lacatski ran the AAWSAP UFO program for the DIA.) Corbell: "We hear about all these people on military bases seeing triangles, and you're doing this study, AAWSAP, to try to figure out the physics of how to do that. Do you think it's already been achieved by the U.S. government, or it hasn't, and that's why AAWSAP had a lot of value." Lacatski: "It hasn't been achieved to its full extent." ~D'Amato~ Dick D'Amato was a longtime (18 years) senior staffer for Senate Democratic Leader Robert C. Byrd of West Virginia.) "Dick D'Amato has returned from Belgium where he met with Colonel De Brouwer, a 'very interesting fellow.' Dick’s conclusion, again, is that the triangular objects are very plain human craft. ~Jacques Vallée's Forbidden Science Volume 4 - November 1992 ~ Brown: "So either, what's going on is, you know, there's some sort of recurring exchange or...and use of our facilities by whatever is piloting these big black triangles. Or, we have some sort of derivative technology ourselves that operate from these bases. "Jeff Nuccetelli (Jeff Nuccetelli) also described, you know, a big , black triangle coming out of the Pacific Ocean, flying into Vandenberg, basically hovering over the runway at Vandenberg Air Force Base and then disappearing." ~ Nuccetelli at the Congressional Hearing: "I talked to five shaken witnesses who described a massive triangular craft, larger than a football field, that hovered silently for about 45 seconds over their entry-control point before shooting away at impossible speed." ~ Jesse Michels - Jesse Michels: "Dylan Borland, also at Langley in 2012." Brown: "Exactly." ~ Dylan Borland at the Congressional Hearing: "At approximately 01 30, I saw an, approximately, 100-foot equilateral triangle take off from near the NASA hangar on the base." ~ Michels: "He sees this triangular craft, seemingly, kind of come out of, or maybe it was hovering around a NASA hangar at the Air Force base, and then it flies at his head. And then it flies off." ~My Tweet from October 2025~~~ Daniel Gockerell on Weaponized, and My Comments 2006, Eglin AFB... Murgia 2025: "This sounds similar to what Dylan Borland says he saw at Langley AFB. If this stuff is so secret, why do they seem so lax in allowing others, who are not cleared, to see it? "If this craft exists... "Is it ours, that we developed own our own? "Is it craft that we constructed and reverse engineered, based, in part, on technology of unknown origin that we have acquired? "Is it a craft of unknown origin that we acquired and learned how to fly? "Are 'they' working with us and showing us how to fly 'their' craft?" ~ Daniel Gockerell: "I step outside, and I look to my left...and I see hovering, about 15 to 20 feet off the ground, this giant, maybe 300 or so feet in length (size of a football field. ~Joe), aircraft. "This just goes straight up and it's dead quiet, nothing, not a sound. I could hear the buzzing from the generator lights, right? So, this gets about to the canopy, like, height, a little over the canopy, and does a slight bank, and takes off. "This aircraft, when it banks, I can see that it's a perfect triangle, and it's gigantic, and it has a white light at each apex of the triangle and a large, white light in the center. And it takes off, and it zips out of sight. I mean, Mach something we don't know." Full transcript and video clip... ~End Gockerell Transcript~ (And let's not forgot my friend, Michael Via, who says he saw a "majestic," silent black triangle in 1992 in the Persian Gulf. Watch him talk about it here. ⬇️) ~ Brown: "Yeah, I'd be pretty freaked out if that happened to me. Yeah, so, you know, these are all examples of the United States having some sort of relationship with these craft, whether it's our own, gifted tech, or truly a third party, can only speculate. But, you know, I have some good guesses." Michels: "What's your best guess?" Brown: "That there is an exchange or some sort of arrangement with whatever is piloting the black triangles that are not ours? I believe we do have a derivative version at this point, but that is, again, derived from the real thing. And the real thing, there is some sort of ongoing contact and communication, clearly, not just the United States, but other governments as well. That's my opinion." (An agreement between some aspect of our government and an anomalous intelligence that flies the triangles that are NOT our reverse engineered craft? Are there multiple governments in contact with a non-human intelligence and working side-by-side with "them"?) Michels: "And when it flies in the vicinity, there's like, some sort of download that occurs. There's like a transmission of information." Brown: "That's what some people have reported. Again, I did not come across official information. Well, I did not come across information on that in the Immaculate-Constellation briefing." (In other words, Brown is suggesting that he may have come across information about that from sources other than the Immaculate Constellation files.) Michels: "Okay, all right. We'll read between the lines there." ~ (Murgia 2026: Now the interesting part. Does anybody remember when I shared this from Jeremy McGowan? I have posts about it that go back to 2021. This one is from 2024 and I edited it very lightly for grammar and clarity.) Murgia 2024: "A few years ago, in some private group, [Jeremy McGowan] said he was at Lue's place in Wyoming. "Someone shared his comments with me and here they are..." McGowan: "From Lue's mouth to my face while I was at his place for a week back in January [of 2021]. Lue (allegedly): "We know who's in the saucers. We know who is in the triangles. We don't have a clue who is in the Tic Tacs." (I asked a source about that and they said the information (in those three sentences) was accurate. But there's no evidence to back it up so, as with everything here, remain skeptical. More on what Lue allegedly told McGowan in 2021... 👇🏼 ) Q from a Group DM: "So saucers and triangles are terrestrial and Tic Tac aren't?" McGowan: "Not exactly. Saucers are 'ultra-terrestrial.' Triangles are a result of reverse engineering and sometimes piloted by 'them' and other times piloted by 'us AND them.' And the Tic Tacs are a complete enigma." ~ Murgia 2024: "Are triangular UFOs sometimes piloted by us and them, with them being NHI? Do some NHI work alongside us in classified programs? I don't know." ~End 2024 Tweet~ (Murgia 2026: That source who told me those first three sentences were accurate? They backed down from that a year or so later. Did they misunderstand what I was originally asking? Or, did they realize they shouldn't have shared that with me because it was "sensitive" and they wanted to do some damage control? I don't know. I also put out a long tweet a few years ago about OG remote viewer, Lyn Buchanan, talking about seeing what he thought were non-humans working alongside humans.) Buchanan: "I'm 𝑠𝑎𝑦𝑖𝑛𝑔 that I have seen extraterrestrials working 𝑤𝑖𝑡ℎ humans in black op areas. In human, black op areas." You can read the full post here: ~ (Murgia 2026: Here are the names of folks who have spoken about possible agreements between human governments and a non-human intelligence, and/or...Us working with "Them." David Grusch Lue Elizondo (allegedly, since it's second hand) Dylan Borland Matthew Brown Lenval Logan - Try.ThePhenom.App (A month or so ago, on a podcast, he said someone told him to look into "agreements," but he didn't say who told him.) Lyn Buchanan And, a contact of mine who brought it up out of the blue a few months ago. It caught me off guard. 👀 Several years ago, in an interview with Project Unity, Sean Cahill (who was there when McGowan spent time at Lue's in 2021) was asked about the "we-know-who's-in-the-saucers" claim. He said, "That's bullsh*t... That is the outline of a fiction story." I'm not so sure. One more thing: I asked Lue about it when he did a Clubhouse event in July of 2021.) Murgia: "If we believe that the Mussolini craft retrieval took place, we may have data from 90 years ago, all the way until now. Is it valid speculation that we know who's inside of some of these craft? And I know you may not be able to answer that. But if this information is classified, like, who's in the saucers, who's inside the triangles, why would that be classified? It's not sources and methods." Lue: "Exactly right. That's my concern. You can only classify information to protect sources and methods, and you cannot...it's illegal to classify information just because something is embarrassing." (I tried again. 🙂) Murgia: "Do we have any idea who's inside some of these craft?" Lue: "Uhh, you know, I prefer not to answer that question right now simply because, umm, I don't have a good response for that. I think we've got a lot of ideas, and I think there's a lot of anecdotal information out there, but at the end of the day, we still don't know entirely what we're dealing with and that's problematic." (We'd all like to know how Brown and the others came to form these opinions about Us and "Them." Did the alleged comments from Lue in 2021 have anything to do with it? Did any of them read about that? Is any of this true? Again, I don't know. But if it IS, I'd say it would constitute a BOMBSHELL. And I rarely use that (overused) word.)](https://image.24vids.com/tw-2094684600530612451/amplify_video_thumb/2094612914275807232/img/ZFaAC5u3EJ3TN779.jpg)
