Thread Reader helps you read and share Twitter threads easily!
I'm @ThreadReaderApp a Twitter bot here to help you read threads more easily. To trigger me, you just have to reply to (or quote) any tweet of the thread you want to unroll and mention me with the "unroll" keyword and I'll send you a link back on Twitter 😀
— Thread Reader App (@threadreaderapp) November 25, 2017
X thread is series of posts by the same author connected with a line!
From any post in the thread, mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll
Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us easily!
Practice here first or read more on our help page!
Recent
@atrupar @Shayan86 1).
The so-called „Donroe Doctrine” according to Orange Man @POTUS @realDonaldTrump
ʕ•ᴥ•ʔ
The so-called „Donroe Doctrine” according to Orange Man @POTUS @realDonaldTrump
ʕ•ᴥ•ʔ
@atrupar @Shayan86 @POTUS @realDonaldTrump 2).
𝕿𝖍𝖊 𝕹𝖊𝖜 𝖄𝖔𝖗𝖐 𝕿𝖎𝖒𝖊𝖘 (@nytimes) Nov. 17, 2025 archive.ph/gZIFX
𝕿𝖍𝖊 𝖂𝖆𝖘𝖍𝖎𝖓𝖌𝖙𝖔𝖓 𝕻𝖔𝖘𝖙 (@washingtonpost) Dec. 31, 2025 archive.ph/pR8YR
𝕿𝖍𝖊 𝕹𝖊𝖜 𝖄𝖔𝖗𝖐 𝕿𝖎𝖒𝖊𝖘 (@nytimes) Nov. 17, 2025 archive.ph/gZIFX
𝕿𝖍𝖊 𝖂𝖆𝖘𝖍𝖎𝖓𝖌𝖙𝖔𝖓 𝕻𝖔𝖘𝖙 (@washingtonpost) Dec. 31, 2025 archive.ph/pR8YR
@atrupar @Shayan86 @POTUS @realDonaldTrump @nytimes @washingtonpost 3).
@USATODAY Jan. 4, 2026 eu.usatoday.com/story/news/pol…
@France24_en Jan. 4, 2026 france24.com/en/live-news/2…
@USATODAY Jan. 4, 2026 eu.usatoday.com/story/news/pol…
@France24_en Jan. 4, 2026 france24.com/en/live-news/2…
There are none so blind as those who refuse to see and become useful idiots towards their own destruction. Israel is not the problem. Israel is the solution. She has been fighting against Islamic terror, the kind we are seeing here in the streets of America and
1)
1)
on college campuses. That is where the movement to destroy America began.
1. Charlie Kirk was killed after he said Islam was incompatible with the West.
2)
1. Charlie Kirk was killed after he said Islam was incompatible with the West.
2)
“We’ve been warning about the rise of Islqm on the show, to great amount of backlash. We don’t care, that’s what we do here. And we said that Islam is not compatible with Western civilisation.” — reported from his show, June 24, 2025
3)
3)
The second book in the ‘Anomaly in the Construct’ series by Carli B. Frueh isn’t just a story—it’s a war drum, a cracked mirror, a blueprint for breaking free. Out now, this isn’t fiction; it’s a vivid, pulse-pounding dive into a world where the cage is clay, and the keys are
ours to seize.
Picture this: a desert night, the glow of a dying phone, and a flood of raw voices spilling across X—real people, not puppets, peeling back the multilayered psychological operations being fed. That’s where Controlled Rebellion begins, born from the same restless
Picture this: a desert night, the glow of a dying phone, and a flood of raw voices spilling across X—real people, not puppets, peeling back the multilayered psychological operations being fed. That’s where Controlled Rebellion begins, born from the same restless
hum that’s driving a digital uprising. “Illusion Veils the Matrix, We Architect Our Own Reality, writes Carli B. Frueh, eloquently channels the defiance of a community done with scripted outrage and hollow influencers. This book is for the TruthSeeker777s, the NeoMatrix007s,
1/15 What a shame...I know MANY registered nurses...my daughter is one of them. I find them highly intelligent, but if you REALLY think God would send us someone so FLAWED to lead us, you are NOT among that group. He is a LIAR first off, and God HATES liars. Trump has NO morals,
2/15 ethics, love, decency, integrity, honor, empathy, kindness, willing to help those less fortunate than himself, and basically a HORRIBLE human being, who is using the Presidency to enrich himself, his friends, and his family. He has added THREE BILLION to his wealth since
3/15 entering office in January. He is a full blown racist who treats those needing refuse within our walls like vermin, and people from Somalia "garbage", calling a SITTING member of Congress garbage and for her to go back to her "shithole" country; she was BORN in the United
Saudi Arabia's q3 current account numbers are out, and they -- unsurprisingly -- showed an ongoing deficit.
My rough estimate for Saudi Arabia's current account break even (the oil price that results in external balance) continues to be over $90 a barrel
1/x
My rough estimate for Saudi Arabia's current account break even (the oil price that results in external balance) continues to be over $90 a barrel
1/x
A reminder -- the external break even is calculating using reported oil export revenues, the non-oil current account, and net exports (my numbers there are dependent on getting regular updates from @Rory_Johnston )
2/
2/
@Rory_Johnston i.e. Saudi Arabia needs $250 billion a year in export receipts from oil to balance its current account -- and that is much more than it gets with oil at ~ $60 a barrel
3/
3/
Roger Froikin @rlefraim wrote, "Democrats are already seeking to make criminal accusations against Trump for grabbing Venezuela’s President Maduro.
1)
1)
But some of us remember when Democrat presidents did much worse, all without informing Congress under the War Powers Act, and with absolutely no reason that touched on American interests.
2)
2)
Bill Clinton, without consulting Congress, near the end of his term in 1999, viciously bombed Serbia, destroying much of its capital’s infrastructure, damaging hospitals and civilian residences, and killing up to 25,000 people, all civilians.
3)
3)
A Republic In Name Only: How Republics End Without Officially Dying
“A republic has a longer life and a greater stability than a principality, because it can adapt itself better to the diversity of circumstances.”
— Niccolò Machiavelli (1469–1527), Discourses on Livy, Book III, Chapter 9
————————————————————
🧵1/7: When President Donald Trump shared images purporting to show Venezuela’s Nicolás Maduro in U.S. custody, the moment carried a warning larger than the image itself. It suggested a form of power that no longer waits for law, deliberation, or institutional consent to act.
History offers a name for this condition.
Republics do not always collapse when authority escapes their institutions. Sometimes they endure—courts speaking, legislatures meeting, elections proceeding—long after the rule of law has become ceremonial, and power has learned to operate beyond it.
…eintellectualistofficial.substack.com/p/a-republic-i…
“A republic has a longer life and a greater stability than a principality, because it can adapt itself better to the diversity of circumstances.”
— Niccolò Machiavelli (1469–1527), Discourses on Livy, Book III, Chapter 9
————————————————————
🧵1/7: When President Donald Trump shared images purporting to show Venezuela’s Nicolás Maduro in U.S. custody, the moment carried a warning larger than the image itself. It suggested a form of power that no longer waits for law, deliberation, or institutional consent to act.
History offers a name for this condition.
Republics do not always collapse when authority escapes their institutions. Sometimes they endure—courts speaking, legislatures meeting, elections proceeding—long after the rule of law has become ceremonial, and power has learned to operate beyond it.
…eintellectualistofficial.substack.com/p/a-republic-i…
2/7: When President Donald Trump posted on Truth Social images purporting to show Venezuela’s president, Nicolás Maduro, in U.S. custody—eyes and ears covered, the scene framed as a completed capture—they functioned less as information than as proof. They did not explain a process, establish jurisdiction, or argue a case. They presented domination as already accomplished.
Whatever their factual or procedural status, their purpose was unmistakable: not to persuade, but to render authority legible by staging power as a visible fact.
What mattered was not accuracy but effectiveness. The image was not governance on display, but power performing itself. Its audience was domestic. Its message was simple and old: authority works, enemies can be subdued, and strength can be condensed into a single, graspable scene. Complexity disappeared. What remained was the assurance of capacity: we did this; we could do it again.
This instinct—to convert domination into visibility—is not a modern invention. It is a political technology that predates mass media and survives every change in communications infrastructure. Wherever republics hollow without collapsing, authority learns to announce itself not through deliberation or law, but through scenes that present outcomes as settled before any institution is asked to speak.
Rome understood this logic long before algorithms or feeds. It learned that domination no longer requires persuasion once it can be seen, and that a single image of subjugation can do the work of a thousand arguments. The ancient world had no screens, but it had crowds—and Rome knew how to feed them.
When Julius Caesar defeated the Gauls, he paraded their leader, Vercingetorix, through Rome in chains before executing him as the culminating note of a triumph. It is difficult, from a modern distance, to reconstruct what that meant to a Roman crowd. It was not a policy debate. It was not even an argument. It was proof. A conquered man made visible is a conquered future made believable.
…eintellectualistofficial.substack.com/p/a-republic-i…
Whatever their factual or procedural status, their purpose was unmistakable: not to persuade, but to render authority legible by staging power as a visible fact.
What mattered was not accuracy but effectiveness. The image was not governance on display, but power performing itself. Its audience was domestic. Its message was simple and old: authority works, enemies can be subdued, and strength can be condensed into a single, graspable scene. Complexity disappeared. What remained was the assurance of capacity: we did this; we could do it again.
This instinct—to convert domination into visibility—is not a modern invention. It is a political technology that predates mass media and survives every change in communications infrastructure. Wherever republics hollow without collapsing, authority learns to announce itself not through deliberation or law, but through scenes that present outcomes as settled before any institution is asked to speak.
Rome understood this logic long before algorithms or feeds. It learned that domination no longer requires persuasion once it can be seen, and that a single image of subjugation can do the work of a thousand arguments. The ancient world had no screens, but it had crowds—and Rome knew how to feed them.
When Julius Caesar defeated the Gauls, he paraded their leader, Vercingetorix, through Rome in chains before executing him as the culminating note of a triumph. It is difficult, from a modern distance, to reconstruct what that meant to a Roman crowd. It was not a policy debate. It was not even an argument. It was proof. A conquered man made visible is a conquered future made believable.
…eintellectualistofficial.substack.com/p/a-republic-i…
3/7: Caesar’s conquest did not weaken Rome economically—it flooded the state with wealth—but it broke the Republic by concentrating military loyalty, money, and legitimacy in one man. Even if the damage was not immediate, Gaul marked the point at which Rome learned that unchecked victory made republican governance structurally untenable. A republic can survive mediocre leaders and routine corruption. It cannot survive a permanent engine that manufactures men larger than the state itself.
This is the first mechanism by which republics end without ending: the slow displacement of institutional legitimacy by personal legitimacy, until the institutions remain—named, staffed, ritualized—while the decisions that matter migrate elsewhere. This transfer of authority away from offices and toward individuals is the central dynamic of republican erosion: legitimacy migration.
Modern readers sometimes imagine propaganda as a uniquely contemporary disease, a byproduct of mass literacy, broadcast networks, or algorithmic feeds. Rome had none of these, but it had public space, rumor networks, and a political culture that treated visibility as authority. Pompeii’s surviving walls make this plain—electoral notices, endorsements, insults, rivalries—politics on plaster, as recognizable as any modern comment thread.
The triumph converted violence into legitimacy. It taught the public what power looked like, who possessed it, and what obedience should feel like. It was governance by demonstration: not persuasion, but registration.
What Caesar learned in Gaul was not merely how to conquer territory, but how victory itself could relocate legitimacy away from institutions and into the hands of the man who delivered it. And once legitimacy migrates, it does not easily return.
By the time Julius Caesar was assassinated in 44 BC, the Roman Republic was already structurally hollow. Decades of civil war, elite paralysis, and widening inequality had eroded trust in senatorial governance. Caesar’s conquests had concentrated military loyalty, wealth, and legitimacy in a single individual, and his murder removed the man without restoring the institutions his rise had eclipsed. The Senate could eliminate Caesar. It could not retrieve the authority that had already slipped from its grasp.
That failure mattered more than the murder itself.
The conspirators believed that removing Caesar would restore the Republic—that the system, once relieved of a tyrant, would reassert itself through custom, law, and precedent. What they failed to grasp was that Caesar had not overthrown the Republic so much as exposed its incapacity. Killing him did not reverse that exposure. It made it undeniable.
Caesar remained widely popular even as he dismantled republican norms. To Romans exhausted by corruption, debt, and instability, he appeared less as a destroyer of institutions than as their corrective.
He delivered land to veterans, relief to debtors, visible results to the urban poor, and victory to a society that equated conquest with greatness. Constitutional erosion mattered less than outcomes that could be seen and felt. What the Senate experienced as the collapse of republican governance, many Romans experienced as the restoration of order and pride.
Institutions fail first.
Legitimacy erodes second.
Power consolidates only afterward.
The error of the conspirators was to treat Caesar as the cause rather than the consequence of institutional failure. Once legitimacy had migrated to a single figure, removing that figure could not return it to the Senate. It could only reveal how little authority the institutions retained.
The aftermath confirmed the mistake. Rome did not rally around the Senate. It fragmented. Violence resumed. Alliances hardened. The vacuum left by Caesar’s death did not invite restoration; it invited competition. Power, once personalized, does not depersonalize itself voluntarily.
In the years following the assassination, Rome entered a brief and illusory interregnum. Mark Antony—Caesar’s closest political ally—and Octavian—his adopted heir—initially feared a decisive response from the assassins. When none came, they turned instead on those they believed threatened them. The result was not a return to republican deliberation but the Second Triumvirate: a legally sanctioned regime of violence that deployed proscriptions—state-approved political killings paired with mass confiscation of property.
Terror was not an aberration. It was a tool, normalized through law.
The Republic still existed on paper. Magistracies were filled. Laws were passed. Rituals continued. But authority no longer flowed from deliberation. It flowed from force, and from the promise of protection against that force. The institutions had become a shell—still standing, still named, still ritualized, but no longer sovereign.
The question after Caesar was no longer whether the Republic could be restored. It was who would learn to rule a system whose authority had already migrated beyond its forms.
…eintellectualistofficial.substack.com/p/a-republic-i…
This is the first mechanism by which republics end without ending: the slow displacement of institutional legitimacy by personal legitimacy, until the institutions remain—named, staffed, ritualized—while the decisions that matter migrate elsewhere. This transfer of authority away from offices and toward individuals is the central dynamic of republican erosion: legitimacy migration.
Modern readers sometimes imagine propaganda as a uniquely contemporary disease, a byproduct of mass literacy, broadcast networks, or algorithmic feeds. Rome had none of these, but it had public space, rumor networks, and a political culture that treated visibility as authority. Pompeii’s surviving walls make this plain—electoral notices, endorsements, insults, rivalries—politics on plaster, as recognizable as any modern comment thread.
The triumph converted violence into legitimacy. It taught the public what power looked like, who possessed it, and what obedience should feel like. It was governance by demonstration: not persuasion, but registration.
What Caesar learned in Gaul was not merely how to conquer territory, but how victory itself could relocate legitimacy away from institutions and into the hands of the man who delivered it. And once legitimacy migrates, it does not easily return.
By the time Julius Caesar was assassinated in 44 BC, the Roman Republic was already structurally hollow. Decades of civil war, elite paralysis, and widening inequality had eroded trust in senatorial governance. Caesar’s conquests had concentrated military loyalty, wealth, and legitimacy in a single individual, and his murder removed the man without restoring the institutions his rise had eclipsed. The Senate could eliminate Caesar. It could not retrieve the authority that had already slipped from its grasp.
That failure mattered more than the murder itself.
The conspirators believed that removing Caesar would restore the Republic—that the system, once relieved of a tyrant, would reassert itself through custom, law, and precedent. What they failed to grasp was that Caesar had not overthrown the Republic so much as exposed its incapacity. Killing him did not reverse that exposure. It made it undeniable.
Caesar remained widely popular even as he dismantled republican norms. To Romans exhausted by corruption, debt, and instability, he appeared less as a destroyer of institutions than as their corrective.
He delivered land to veterans, relief to debtors, visible results to the urban poor, and victory to a society that equated conquest with greatness. Constitutional erosion mattered less than outcomes that could be seen and felt. What the Senate experienced as the collapse of republican governance, many Romans experienced as the restoration of order and pride.
Institutions fail first.
Legitimacy erodes second.
Power consolidates only afterward.
The error of the conspirators was to treat Caesar as the cause rather than the consequence of institutional failure. Once legitimacy had migrated to a single figure, removing that figure could not return it to the Senate. It could only reveal how little authority the institutions retained.
The aftermath confirmed the mistake. Rome did not rally around the Senate. It fragmented. Violence resumed. Alliances hardened. The vacuum left by Caesar’s death did not invite restoration; it invited competition. Power, once personalized, does not depersonalize itself voluntarily.
In the years following the assassination, Rome entered a brief and illusory interregnum. Mark Antony—Caesar’s closest political ally—and Octavian—his adopted heir—initially feared a decisive response from the assassins. When none came, they turned instead on those they believed threatened them. The result was not a return to republican deliberation but the Second Triumvirate: a legally sanctioned regime of violence that deployed proscriptions—state-approved political killings paired with mass confiscation of property.
Terror was not an aberration. It was a tool, normalized through law.
The Republic still existed on paper. Magistracies were filled. Laws were passed. Rituals continued. But authority no longer flowed from deliberation. It flowed from force, and from the promise of protection against that force. The institutions had become a shell—still standing, still named, still ritualized, but no longer sovereign.
The question after Caesar was no longer whether the Republic could be restored. It was who would learn to rule a system whose authority had already migrated beyond its forms.
…eintellectualistofficial.substack.com/p/a-republic-i…
KIELCE POGROM
After the German occupation ended, antisemitic violence against Jews in Poland did not cease. In the years 1944–1946, between 1,000 to 2,000 Jewish survivors of the Holocaust were murdered in postwar pogroms, mob attacks, and
1)
After the German occupation ended, antisemitic violence against Jews in Poland did not cease. In the years 1944–1946, between 1,000 to 2,000 Jewish survivors of the Holocaust were murdered in postwar pogroms, mob attacks, and
1)
acts of banditry carried out by Polish civilians and armed groups. These crimes reflected deep-rooted antisemitism that persisted even after the Holocaust ended.
2)
2)
The most notorious of these attacks was the Kielce pogrom of July 1946, when a mob murdered 42 Jews who had survived Nazi persecution.
Photo: Funeral procession for victims of the Kielce pogrom, Kielce, Poland, July 1946.
3)
Photo: Funeral procession for victims of the Kielce pogrom, Kielce, Poland, July 1946.
3)
Good Morning Guys!
Waking up to some fresh innovation that actually gets you excited. Imagine starting your day knowing @OfficialXYO is busy bridging the physical and digital worlds just to make sure you finally have full control over your own data.
Then you look at what @Bappfun is doing on Base, giving independent devs a real stage to grow their mini apps with the community in a totally transparent on chain way. And for the sports fans, @SIXR_cricket is literally reshaping the game by bringing cricket into Web3, where playing games earns you real value through NFTs and their token.
The digital world is getting way more interesting when you know which projects to watch. Such a vibe for a productive morning!
Waking up to some fresh innovation that actually gets you excited. Imagine starting your day knowing @OfficialXYO is busy bridging the physical and digital worlds just to make sure you finally have full control over your own data.
Then you look at what @Bappfun is doing on Base, giving independent devs a real stage to grow their mini apps with the community in a totally transparent on chain way. And for the sports fans, @SIXR_cricket is literally reshaping the game by bringing cricket into Web3, where playing games earns you real value through NFTs and their token.
The digital world is getting way more interesting when you know which projects to watch. Such a vibe for a productive morning!
@OfficialXYO @threadreaderapp unroll
@OfficialXYO @pikaso_me screenshot this
Everybody needs to save this article to their computer, because the original publisher is now down.
If you do not understand the relationship between the Intel Agencies and investment banks, you're missing the big picture:
archive.ph/GVHEY
If you do not understand the relationship between the Intel Agencies and investment banks, you're missing the big picture:
archive.ph/GVHEY
Investment Banks are basically the modern form of Merchant Banks, which have basically facilitated international trade for centuries, carrying on the ways of, e.g., the Phoenicians.
Rev 18:
Rev 18:
Actually, I'm going to just take screenshots and post the whole thing here as another backup--it's that important.
Ehud Barak's sent email 125 (Hyperion) was sent to Udi Knaani of FWMK Law; it concerns an agreement between GMF Capital and FST Biometrics. There's also mention of "Renova."
Let's take a step back and understand what's going on here: certain people with government connections are using their privileged intel to make investments. THAT'S what I mean when I say that the intel agencies and investment bankers go hand-in-hand: archive.ph/GVHEY
Once you control the government, you control the outcomes. That's why people/corporations making investments along places where the New Silk Road was supposed to be built are suspect--because it seems to me like that was the big conspiracy the globalists were part of:
I respectfully disagree. It is highly likely that recent U.S. action in Venezuela will embolden authoritarian states. There are at least 3 reasons. 🧵
1/1⃣ Many analysts underestimate how authoritarian systems breed deep self-righteousness. Their elites may occasionally acknowledge own double standards in private, but more often genuinely believe they are morally responsible and legally righteous—even more so than the West.
2/ Putin would not lecture for hours about his version of history—really his sense of historical justice and legality—if he did not feel profoundly self-righteous. This mindset is less cynical posturing than sincere belief.
