正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

258,173 次观看 • 1 年前 •via X (Twitter)

11 条评论

Zayn Squad Brasil 𓊍 的头像
Zayn Squad Brasil 𓊍1 年前

a gente demorando um ano pra descobrir que era what makes you beautiful

Zayn Squad Brasil 𓊍 的头像
Zayn Squad Brasil 𓊍1 年前

ai n to aguentando

RedDeer.Games 的头像
RedDeer.Games4 年前

[NINTENDO] Exclusive Now Available ➡️ #AAAclock ➡️ #SwitchOnline #SwitchOLED

☆⛤✭✩✯ 的头像
☆⛤✭✩✯1 年前

oxe ele cantando em cursivo

elle⁷ 的头像
elle⁷1 年前

A VOZ DE ANJO ABENCOA ESSE VOCAL DEUS

manu 的头像
manu1 年前

CARALHO ARREPIEI SKXJDAKAOK

julieflu. 🌻 的头像
julieflu. 🌻1 年前

“You don’t know you beautiful” é isso mesmo?, squad ?

samuel៹ ☁️ 的头像
samuel៹ ☁️1 年前

Retirando o like que eu dei no post, homem canalha

♡˙⋆ ✮˙⋆✧₊⁺ 的头像
♡˙⋆ ✮˙⋆✧₊⁺1 年前

será que ele tá testando algumas músicas da 1D pra cantar no México? 😭😭😭🥺🥺

juridico davi brito 的头像
juridico davi brito1 年前

@jaaopredoo o mateus do bbb cantando

Tchunai 的头像
Tchunai1 年前

sai do fake Matheus do bbb

相关视频

Elon Musk described the mechanism that lets millions of intelligent people arrive at the same conclusion without a single independent input between them. Musk: “If your entire exposure is to legacy mainstream media, so that all your information sources are that Trump is basically Hitler, and your friend group has that same information, you have no countervailing opinion.” One source, repeated back by a friend group drawing on that same source, is a single input arriving twelve times. Agreement gets counted as evidence. A belief that has never met resistance feels, from the inside, identical to one that survived it. That is why almost nobody catches it in themselves. Musk: “Then they actually just think Trump is Hitler, even though it’s a little strange he didn’t do Hitler things the last four years.” The comparison had four years of executive power to prove itself and produced nothing. The belief held anyway. Any description of a person that survives the total absence of supporting events was never built on events. Then the same apparatus turned on the man saying it. He spent a decade celebrated as the builder of the electric car company and the rocket company that put American astronauts back in orbit from American soil. The engineering never changed. His politics did, and the coverage inverted inside a single news cycle. Output was never the variable being measured. No conspiracy is required. Outrage outperforms accuracy on every number a newsroom is graded on. Thousands of people chasing one incentive produce coordination nobody had to organize. The arrangement collapsed when the layer between the source and the reader disappeared. The person who was in the room posts it, and the correction comes from someone else who was in the room. It is louder, uglier, and far more honest. Contradiction now arrives whether you invite it or not. Even the owner of the platform gets corrected on his own posts by his own product. For most of the last century a few dozen editors decided what an entire country believed had happened that day. People accepted it as the natural order because no alternative had ever existed to measure it against. Every civilization inherits its picture of reality from whoever controls the distance between an event and the people who hear about it. That distance is now close to zero for the first time in human history. The filter is gone and it cannot be rebuilt. What you believe is finally yours.

Dustin

772,067 次观看 • 1 天前

🇮🇷🇮🇱 Our debate made clear just how far apart Israel and the U.S. actually are on what ""winning"" the Iran war even means. Jonathan Conricus held his line from months ago: no deal is a win unless it dismantles Iran's proxy network and missile program too. Anything short of that, he says, is a loss dressed up as progress. Trita Parsi's pushback: that's the Israeli definition of victory, not the American one. Trump's team has quietly redefined success multiple times already, and Parsi thinks they'll take whatever deal lets them walk away and call it a win. Probably one Israel actively opposes, since lifting sanctions is exactly what Iran wants and Israel doesn't. The sharpest exchange was about munitions. Parsi points to CSIS, an FDD colleague's own public warnings, and even the U.S. ambassador to the UN flagging depleted stockpiles. Conricus's counter: most of that traces back to anonymous sources, and he's skeptical anyone's really counting. Neither one has hard numbers, which itself says something about how opaque this has gotten five months in. Underneath the sparring, an actual disagreement about the region's trajectory: Conricus thinks Iran's regime is running out of money and will eventually collapse under its own weight. Parsi thinks the war has done more to erode U.S. credibility with Gulf allies than it has to weaken Tehran, pointing to Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Pakistan forming their own defense pact as evidence countries are already hedging away from relying on Washington. Where they land: Conricus says holding the line against a nuclear-capable Iran is worth the cost, whatever it's cost so far. Parsi says a war under 25% public support, dragging on past its promised 4 days, is actual proof that nobody defined what winning looked like before it started. Thank you both Jonathan Conricus & Trita Parsi

Mario Nawfal

308,961 次观看 • 13 天前