Most recent unrolls from @ThreadReaderApp
🧵Russia is the 3rd-largest oil producer on Earth. Right now, 90 percent of its regions are actively rationing fuel.
Ukrainian drones disabled 8 of Russia's 10 largest refineries, striking targets up to 1,500 miles deep, as domestic gasoline output collapsed by a third. 1/🇺🇦🧵
Ukrainian drones disabled 8 of Russia's 10 largest refineries, striking targets up to 1,500 miles deep, as domestic gasoline output collapsed by a third. 1/🇺🇦🧵
Western leaders look at Russia's burning refineries and assume Vladimir Putin will be forced to negotiate.
They are dead wrong. They are projecting democratic logic onto an autocrat who views compromise not as a strategy, but as a death sentence. 2/
They are dead wrong. They are projecting democratic logic onto an autocrat who views compromise not as a strategy, but as a death sentence. 2/
Autocrats do not fall because they lose foreign wars. They fall when their internal coalition of elites decides they can no longer guarantee money or security.
To Russian elites, seeking an off-ramp right now reads as fatal weakness. 3/
To Russian elites, seeking an off-ramp right now reads as fatal weakness. 3/
Did John ever meet Paul?
Paul's major missionary journeys (Acts 13-28) largely take place outside of Jerusalem, while John's ministry, according to tradition, was centered in Jerusalem for a long time before he supposedly moved to Ephesus in his old age.
The book of Acts, which is our primary source for this period, never shows them in the same room. When Paul goes to Jerusalem in Acts 15 for the council, he meets with "the apostles and elders" (James, Peter, and John are mentioned by name), but the encounter is framed as a diplomatic negotiation, not a personal meeting between equals. Paul presents his case; they listen and agree on a compromise. It feels formal, distant.
But here's the asterisk: John was one of the "pillars" of the Jerusalem church that Paul mentions in Galatians 2:9. Paul was aware of John. He knew of him, knew his reputation, and knew he was a central authority. John would have certainly known of Paul—the fiery Pharisee who persecuted the church, then had a dramatic conversion, and was now out preaching a "gospel" to the Gentiles that was causing controversy everywhere he went. It's impossible they weren't aware of each other's work and reputation.
The Deeper Reality: A "Yes" of Theological Conflict
The more important answer is yes, they knew each other intimately, not as friends, but as theological adversaries. They knew each other through their ideas and their followers.
Think about it:
John's community and Paul's communities were in direct competition. They were both vying for the soul of the Jesus movement.
John would have heard Paul's letters read aloud in churches. He would have encountered his converts, his arguments, his theology of the atonement, his teachings on submission to authority, and his rigid moral codes.
John's Gospel and letters can be read as a direct, though subtle, rebuttal to Pauline ideas. Where Paul emphasizes faith as a set of beliefs, John emphasizes love and abiding in Christ. Where Paul talks about a future resurrection, John emphasizes eternal life now as a present reality of knowing God. The contrasts are too sharp to be coincidental.
Why This Matters for my Interpretation of Paul this evening.
This lack of a personal meeting is actually the strongest piece of evidence of one of my theories of Paul being the false teacher in Revelations..
If John had publicly named Paul, it would have been dismissed as a personal squabble. "Oh, that's just John, he never liked Paul. They had that argument back in Jerusalem." It would have been framed as a power struggle between two apostles.
By not naming him, John elevates the conflict. He's not just settling a score with a rival. He is revealing a cosmic principle. He is showing that the enemy isn't a man; it's a type of deception. The False Prophet is a role, a function, a spirit that can inhabit anyone who takes the message of the Lamb and uses it to serve the Beast.
John's anonymity in his attack makes it more powerful, not less. It says, "This isn't about Paul the man. This is about the system he represents. It is a deception so subtle, so 'lamb-like,' that it can fool almost everyone. I am showing you its blueprint so you can recognize it, whether it comes from Paul or from anyone else."
So, did John know Paul? He knew him better than most. He saw the effect of his theology. He saw the creation of the image and the mark. And he wrote a warning that would last for 2,000 years, waiting for those with eyes to see to finally understand who he was talking about.
Paul's major missionary journeys (Acts 13-28) largely take place outside of Jerusalem, while John's ministry, according to tradition, was centered in Jerusalem for a long time before he supposedly moved to Ephesus in his old age.
The book of Acts, which is our primary source for this period, never shows them in the same room. When Paul goes to Jerusalem in Acts 15 for the council, he meets with "the apostles and elders" (James, Peter, and John are mentioned by name), but the encounter is framed as a diplomatic negotiation, not a personal meeting between equals. Paul presents his case; they listen and agree on a compromise. It feels formal, distant.
But here's the asterisk: John was one of the "pillars" of the Jerusalem church that Paul mentions in Galatians 2:9. Paul was aware of John. He knew of him, knew his reputation, and knew he was a central authority. John would have certainly known of Paul—the fiery Pharisee who persecuted the church, then had a dramatic conversion, and was now out preaching a "gospel" to the Gentiles that was causing controversy everywhere he went. It's impossible they weren't aware of each other's work and reputation.
The Deeper Reality: A "Yes" of Theological Conflict
The more important answer is yes, they knew each other intimately, not as friends, but as theological adversaries. They knew each other through their ideas and their followers.
Think about it:
John's community and Paul's communities were in direct competition. They were both vying for the soul of the Jesus movement.
John would have heard Paul's letters read aloud in churches. He would have encountered his converts, his arguments, his theology of the atonement, his teachings on submission to authority, and his rigid moral codes.
John's Gospel and letters can be read as a direct, though subtle, rebuttal to Pauline ideas. Where Paul emphasizes faith as a set of beliefs, John emphasizes love and abiding in Christ. Where Paul talks about a future resurrection, John emphasizes eternal life now as a present reality of knowing God. The contrasts are too sharp to be coincidental.
Why This Matters for my Interpretation of Paul this evening.
This lack of a personal meeting is actually the strongest piece of evidence of one of my theories of Paul being the false teacher in Revelations..
If John had publicly named Paul, it would have been dismissed as a personal squabble. "Oh, that's just John, he never liked Paul. They had that argument back in Jerusalem." It would have been framed as a power struggle between two apostles.
By not naming him, John elevates the conflict. He's not just settling a score with a rival. He is revealing a cosmic principle. He is showing that the enemy isn't a man; it's a type of deception. The False Prophet is a role, a function, a spirit that can inhabit anyone who takes the message of the Lamb and uses it to serve the Beast.
John's anonymity in his attack makes it more powerful, not less. It says, "This isn't about Paul the man. This is about the system he represents. It is a deception so subtle, so 'lamb-like,' that it can fool almost everyone. I am showing you its blueprint so you can recognize it, whether it comes from Paul or from anyone else."
So, did John know Paul? He knew him better than most. He saw the effect of his theology. He saw the creation of the image and the mark. And he wrote a warning that would last for 2,000 years, waiting for those with eyes to see to finally understand who he was talking about.
There are three letters traditionally attributed to John:
1 John (The longest and most systematic)
2 John (A brief, personal letter)
3 John (Another brief, personal letter)
Our primary focus will be on 1 John, as it contains the most detailed theological arguments and tests for discerning the spirit of truth from the spirit of deception. 2 John and 3 John will serve as supporting evidence, showing how these core principles were applied in real-world community situations.
So, let's begin the live breakdown using a method I called the John Standard.
The Method:
I will take the key characteristics of the False Prophet (the Second Beast) from Revelation 13 and see how John's letters directly combat them. This is to see if John is essentially giving his community a vaccine against the very deception Paul was spreading.
The First Point of Investigation: The "Horns Like a Lamb" Deception
Revelation 13:11: The False Prophet appears gentle, Christ-like, and harmless ("like a lamb").
Paul's Method: Paul constantly presents himself this way. He uses words like "grace," "meekness," and "suffering for the gospel." He appears as a humble servant.
John's Rebuttal in 1 John: John cuts through the appearance and goes straight to the action. He doesn't care how "lamb-like" someone sounds. He cares how they live.
Let's turn to the text. 1 John 2:3-6:
"And by this we know that we have come to know him, if we keep his commandments. Whoever says 'I know him' but does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him, but whoever keeps his word, in him truly the love of God is perfected. By this we may know that we are in him: whoever says he abides in him ought to walk in the same way in which he walked."
The Breakdown:
John is giving the first and most important test. It's a direct refutation of the "grace alone" argument.
The Claim vs. The Reality:
John says you can identify a liar by the gap between what they say ("I know him") and what they do (they don't keep his commandments).
The Standard: The standard isn't a theological belief system; it's a person's life. The standard is Jesus's life ("walk in the same way in which he walked").
The Indictment: Paul's entire system allows for this very disconnect. You can have "fellowship with him" while your life pattern is one of sin (as Paul describes in Romans 7). John calls this person a liar.
John is saying, "The False Prophet will come to you looking like a lamb, speaking of grace and love. But ignore his appearance. Test his fruit. Does his teaching produce people who walk like Jesus walked? Does it produce obedience to Jesus's commands? Or does it produce people who claim a 'legal status' while their lives remain unchanged?"
This is the first line of defense. The False Prophet's disguise is his "lamb-like" appearance. John's test shreds that disguise to pieces.
Let's do the second test from John's letter.
1 John (The longest and most systematic)
2 John (A brief, personal letter)
3 John (Another brief, personal letter)
Our primary focus will be on 1 John, as it contains the most detailed theological arguments and tests for discerning the spirit of truth from the spirit of deception. 2 John and 3 John will serve as supporting evidence, showing how these core principles were applied in real-world community situations.
So, let's begin the live breakdown using a method I called the John Standard.
The Method:
I will take the key characteristics of the False Prophet (the Second Beast) from Revelation 13 and see how John's letters directly combat them. This is to see if John is essentially giving his community a vaccine against the very deception Paul was spreading.
The First Point of Investigation: The "Horns Like a Lamb" Deception
Revelation 13:11: The False Prophet appears gentle, Christ-like, and harmless ("like a lamb").
Paul's Method: Paul constantly presents himself this way. He uses words like "grace," "meekness," and "suffering for the gospel." He appears as a humble servant.
John's Rebuttal in 1 John: John cuts through the appearance and goes straight to the action. He doesn't care how "lamb-like" someone sounds. He cares how they live.
Let's turn to the text. 1 John 2:3-6:
"And by this we know that we have come to know him, if we keep his commandments. Whoever says 'I know him' but does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him, but whoever keeps his word, in him truly the love of God is perfected. By this we may know that we are in him: whoever says he abides in him ought to walk in the same way in which he walked."
The Breakdown:
John is giving the first and most important test. It's a direct refutation of the "grace alone" argument.
The Claim vs. The Reality:
John says you can identify a liar by the gap between what they say ("I know him") and what they do (they don't keep his commandments).
The Standard: The standard isn't a theological belief system; it's a person's life. The standard is Jesus's life ("walk in the same way in which he walked").
The Indictment: Paul's entire system allows for this very disconnect. You can have "fellowship with him" while your life pattern is one of sin (as Paul describes in Romans 7). John calls this person a liar.
John is saying, "The False Prophet will come to you looking like a lamb, speaking of grace and love. But ignore his appearance. Test his fruit. Does his teaching produce people who walk like Jesus walked? Does it produce obedience to Jesus's commands? Or does it produce people who claim a 'legal status' while their lives remain unchanged?"
This is the first line of defense. The False Prophet's disguise is his "lamb-like" appearance. John's test shreds that disguise to pieces.
Let's do the second test from John's letter.
The Second Test: The Test of Love - The Counterfeit Commandment
The Core Issue:
The False Prophet's system is based on a transaction. It's a legal exchange: you believe the right things about Jesus's death, and God legally declares you righteous. It's a one-to-one transaction between you and God. This creates an individualistic, "me and Jesus" faith.
The Pauline Position (The Straw Man):
Paul's focus is on justification by faith. While he talks about love (the famous 1 Corinthians 13 chapter), it's often presented as an ideal, a spiritual gift, or a result of salvation, not the central, defining commandment of the Christian life. The core of his gospel is the transaction of faith, not the transformation of love.
John's Rebuttal (The Real Deal):
John makes love not a nice add-on, but the single, non-negotiable litmus test for salvation. He presents it as a "new" commandment, but one that is actually as old as the truth itself.
"Beloved, I am writing you no new commandment, but an old commandment that you had from the beginning. The old commandment is the word that you have heard. At the same time, it is a new commandment that I am writing to you, which is true in him and in you, because the darkness is passing away and the true light is already shining. Whoever says he is in the light and hates his brother is still in darkness. Whoever loves his brother abides in the light, and in him there is no cause for stumbling. But whoever hates his brother is in the darkness and walks in the darkness, and does not know where he is going, because the darkness has blinded his eyes." (1 John 2:7-11)
The Breakdown:
This is a devastating critique of the Pauline system.
"An Old Commandment... A New Commandment": John is being brilliant here. The command to love is ancient, but it's new in its application as the ultimate test of knowing God. The "old" way was following rules. The "new" way is living in love.
The Binary Choice: John presents a stark, absolute choice. You are either in the light or in the darkness. The determining factor is not your theological correctness, but your love for your brother (fellow believer). "Whoever says he is in the light and hates his brother is still in darkness."
The Indictment: Paul's system, by its very nature, creates division. It creates "insiders" and "outsiders" based on doctrinal purity. It creates a spirit of judgment and superiority. Think of how Paul constantly tells his communities to shun or expel those who disagree with his teachings (e.g., 1 Corinthians 5, 2 Thessalonians 3:14, Galatians 1:8). This is not the spirit of love; it is the spirit of control. It is, by John's definition, hating your brother. It is walking in darkness.
John is saying, "The False Prophet will come to you with a complex gospel of justification and atonement. He will tell you that your relationship with God is a private, legal matter. I am telling you that your relationship with God is a public, practical matter. You cannot claim to know God if you do not love your brother. Full stop. Period."
The False Prophet's system creates division and judgment. John's system creates community and love. This is the second test. Does the teaching produce unity and radical, self-sacrificial love for other believers? Or does it produce suspicion, division, and a spirit of "I am right, you are out"?
The False Prophet fails this test spectacularly.
Let's read the third and final test from 1 John: The Test of Belief?
The Core Issue:
The False Prophet's system is based on a transaction. It's a legal exchange: you believe the right things about Jesus's death, and God legally declares you righteous. It's a one-to-one transaction between you and God. This creates an individualistic, "me and Jesus" faith.
The Pauline Position (The Straw Man):
Paul's focus is on justification by faith. While he talks about love (the famous 1 Corinthians 13 chapter), it's often presented as an ideal, a spiritual gift, or a result of salvation, not the central, defining commandment of the Christian life. The core of his gospel is the transaction of faith, not the transformation of love.
John's Rebuttal (The Real Deal):
John makes love not a nice add-on, but the single, non-negotiable litmus test for salvation. He presents it as a "new" commandment, but one that is actually as old as the truth itself.
"Beloved, I am writing you no new commandment, but an old commandment that you had from the beginning. The old commandment is the word that you have heard. At the same time, it is a new commandment that I am writing to you, which is true in him and in you, because the darkness is passing away and the true light is already shining. Whoever says he is in the light and hates his brother is still in darkness. Whoever loves his brother abides in the light, and in him there is no cause for stumbling. But whoever hates his brother is in the darkness and walks in the darkness, and does not know where he is going, because the darkness has blinded his eyes." (1 John 2:7-11)
The Breakdown:
This is a devastating critique of the Pauline system.
"An Old Commandment... A New Commandment": John is being brilliant here. The command to love is ancient, but it's new in its application as the ultimate test of knowing God. The "old" way was following rules. The "new" way is living in love.
The Binary Choice: John presents a stark, absolute choice. You are either in the light or in the darkness. The determining factor is not your theological correctness, but your love for your brother (fellow believer). "Whoever says he is in the light and hates his brother is still in darkness."
The Indictment: Paul's system, by its very nature, creates division. It creates "insiders" and "outsiders" based on doctrinal purity. It creates a spirit of judgment and superiority. Think of how Paul constantly tells his communities to shun or expel those who disagree with his teachings (e.g., 1 Corinthians 5, 2 Thessalonians 3:14, Galatians 1:8). This is not the spirit of love; it is the spirit of control. It is, by John's definition, hating your brother. It is walking in darkness.
John is saying, "The False Prophet will come to you with a complex gospel of justification and atonement. He will tell you that your relationship with God is a private, legal matter. I am telling you that your relationship with God is a public, practical matter. You cannot claim to know God if you do not love your brother. Full stop. Period."
The False Prophet's system creates division and judgment. John's system creates community and love. This is the second test. Does the teaching produce unity and radical, self-sacrificial love for other believers? Or does it produce suspicion, division, and a spirit of "I am right, you are out"?
The False Prophet fails this test spectacularly.
Let's read the third and final test from 1 John: The Test of Belief?
This morning, AIPAC was featured on the @nytimes podcast The Daily. The NYT did not ask us for comment or to verify any of the “facts.” As a result, listeners were subjected to several inaccuracies, omissions, and mischaracterizations about our work and our members. Below are just some of these false claims:
❌ CLAIM: AIPAC is assuming a "fully partisan" posture.
✅ FACT: AIPAC’s members are Democrats, Republicans and Independents who advocate for bipartisan policies and build bipartisan support for the U.S.-Israel alliance. We support pro-Israel Democratic and Republican candidates for Congress, and oppose detractors from both parties as well.
✅ FACT: AIPAC’s members are Democrats, Republicans and Independents who advocate for bipartisan policies and build bipartisan support for the U.S.-Israel alliance. We support pro-Israel Democratic and Republican candidates for Congress, and oppose detractors from both parties as well.
❌ CLAIM: AIPAC took Israel’s side over America’s when we opposed the 2015 Iran deal.
✅ FACT: We opposed the JCPOA because the deal didn’t do enough for America’s strategic interests. A bipartisan majority of Congress agreed with our perspective.
✅ FACT: We opposed the JCPOA because the deal didn’t do enough for America’s strategic interests. A bipartisan majority of Congress agreed with our perspective.
La #Belgique🇧🇪 commettrait une grave erreur si elle refusait de nous livrer l'ancien président de l'Équateur, qui a tant nui à son pays en tant que chef de la mafia « correísta », au sein de laquelle prospèrent le trafic de drogue et le crime organisé. 🧵 1/2
2/2
C'est lui qui fait entrer la drogue en Europe et qui blanchit l'argent sale en #Belgique 🇧🇪
La semaine passée Correa nous a exhibé dans cette même plateforme un de ces trois châteaux qu’il a acquis avec narco-Euros❗️
Suite en Espagnol
C'est lui qui fait entrer la drogue en Europe et qui blanchit l'argent sale en #Belgique 🇧🇪
La semaine passée Correa nous a exhibé dans cette même plateforme un de ces trois châteaux qu’il a acquis avec narco-Euros❗️
Suite en Espagnol
#Bélgica 🇧🇪 estaría cometiendo un gran error si se niegan a entregarnos al ex-presidente del Ecuador que tanto daño le ha hecho al país en tanto que jefe de su Mafia Correísta en la que se mueve la droga y el crímen organizado. Hace entrar la droga en Europa💰sucio es lavado en🇧🇪
A lot of the discussion about the depreciation of/undervaluation of China's real effective exchange rate takes for granted that this is about the currency. After all, it's called the "exchange rate"! But it's actually not. Mostly, it's about prices. A rant 1/
China's real effective exchange rate (REER) is a composite of two things, each themselves a composite: 1) an index of the renminbi's exchange rate against a group of its trading partners, weighted by trade, 2) an index of China's prices relative to its trading partners. 2/
The standard reference for the REER is the calculation by the BIS. Its numbers show the pure currency part, the nominal effective exchange rate, is now right back at the recent peak of March 2022. The CFETS index, the trade-weighted exchange rate targeted by the PBOC, is not too different. 3/
If you see a snake today..🐍
1. Based on the Parsi calendar conversion and the text of the Persian Mar-Nāmeh (THE BOOK FOR TAKING OMENS FROM SNAKES), seeing a snake today means you should not look at it, otherwise you will soon have a cause to be sorry.
1. Based on the Parsi calendar conversion and the text of the Persian Mar-Nāmeh (THE BOOK FOR TAKING OMENS FROM SNAKES), seeing a snake today means you should not look at it, otherwise you will soon have a cause to be sorry.
2. Rule 7 cruelly says:
"If you see a snake on the day of Merdad (Amerdid) do not look at it, (or otherwise) you will soon have a cause to be sorry"
According to the Parsees, today is Roj Amardad (also spelled Merdad or Amerdāt).
"If you see a snake on the day of Merdad (Amerdid) do not look at it, (or otherwise) you will soon have a cause to be sorry"
According to the Parsees, today is Roj Amardad (also spelled Merdad or Amerdāt).
3. If you see it, how can you not look at it?
The Book for Taking Omens from Snakes (30 Nov 1892)
By President-Surgeon-Major G. Waters.
"The custom of taking omens from snakes seems to be
very ancient. The people of antiquity associated with the snake various peculiar ideas"
The Book for Taking Omens from Snakes (30 Nov 1892)
By President-Surgeon-Major G. Waters.
"The custom of taking omens from snakes seems to be
very ancient. The people of antiquity associated with the snake various peculiar ideas"
Roger Froikin @rlefraim wrote, "There Is No Such Place Called Palestine.
Yes, I know this will be controversial and, frankly, I do not care.
1)
Yes, I know this will be controversial and, frankly, I do not care.
1)
@rlefraim I think the world desperately needs accuracy and fact, not terms created for political preference, by individuals or nations wanting to control the narrative.
2)
2)
@rlefraim After Rome destroyed the Temple in Jerusalem and murdered close to 1 million Jews through outright murder and starvation, forced the exile of close to 500,000, and took another 240,000 as slaves, leaving a Jewish population of around 50,000 alive,
3)
3)
Have you heard the theory that the Chernobyl disaster was sabotage by Chabad? 👀
.
.
The man tasked with shutting down the generator on that fateful day was the only Jewish engineer at Chernobyl. His coworkers were not in the shielded room with him, so they died while he survived
Interesting.
So the Hasidim had largely been driven out of Chernobyl before the disaster and Chabad centers were not welcome.
BUT.. as soon as the nuclear disaster happened Rebbe Schneerson & Chabad enacted a 'massive humanitarian response' called Children of Chernobyl .... but how was there a massive evacuation program if there were almost no Jewish families left in the area?
So the Hasidim had largely been driven out of Chernobyl before the disaster and Chabad centers were not welcome.
BUT.. as soon as the nuclear disaster happened Rebbe Schneerson & Chabad enacted a 'massive humanitarian response' called Children of Chernobyl .... but how was there a massive evacuation program if there were almost no Jewish families left in the area?
Three veterans shaped my whole career before I ever played a real snap. 2010 Lions locker room. I can still name them.
That league is full of talented guys who never made it, because nobody showed them how to work. Mine found me early.
Dominic Raiola. Cliff Avril. And most of all, Kyle Vanden Bosch. They took me under their wing my rookie year and showed me how to be a pro. I've said that publicly for over a decade because it's true.
Roger Froikin @rlefraim wrote, "Make the Palestine (Terrorist) Flag Illegal.
Those flying this flag would in many places be arrested. It would be really simple. If people paraded the Nazi flag, in many places they would be arrested and the flag destroyed.
1)
Those flying this flag would in many places be arrested. It would be really simple. If people paraded the Nazi flag, in many places they would be arrested and the flag destroyed.
1)
@rlefraim The Palestine flag may be worse, as it represents terrorism, murder, rape, hijacking, burning babies, kidnapping, and hostage taking worldwide. It appears to have been adopted by every far left, violent organization worldwide.
2)
2)
@rlefraim So, it is time that nations should ban this sign of hate and horror.
And groups that use it need to be investigated as to who is financing them, and what kind of activities they are engaged in."
3)
And groups that use it need to be investigated as to who is financing them, and what kind of activities they are engaged in."
3)
Roger Froikin @rlefraim wrote, "Israel Isolated? The facts show a different picture.
If you listen to the media, in the USA, in Israel, in Europe, you would almost have to believe that Israel is being isolated and hated worldwide.
1)
If you listen to the media, in the USA, in Israel, in Europe, you would almost have to believe that Israel is being isolated and hated worldwide.
1)
@rlefraim That is all one hears - Israel is isolating itself, an international pariah.
Some nations in Europe have threatened to stop trade with Israel. Some have threatened to cut diplomatic relations.
So, what is the truth?
The truth is a lot different from the media assumptions.
2)
Some nations in Europe have threatened to stop trade with Israel. Some have threatened to cut diplomatic relations.
So, what is the truth?
The truth is a lot different from the media assumptions.
2)
@rlefraim First of all, Israel has actually improved trade with a whole list of nations during this period and improved relations in general, with most of South Asia - with the exertion of Islamic State of Pakistan and Iran, of course.
3)
3)
When The Shining opened in 1980, it had a different ending. Days later Kubrick sent people into the theaters to physically cut it out of the prints. Here's the scene almost nobody saw🧵👇🏻
1/ You know the ending we have. Wendy and Danny get away. Jack freezes in the maze. Then the camera drifts down a hallway and lands on a photograph. July 4th Ball, 1921. Jack, front and center, decades before he was born.
No explanation. Just the photo.
No explanation. Just the photo.
2/ That isn't where it originally stopped. Between Jack in the snow and that final photo, there was a whole other scene. A hospital. Wendy and Danny recovering, weeks after they got out.
Audiences in New York and LA saw it. Almost no one since has.
Audiences in New York and LA saw it. Almost no one since has.
🧵THREAD🧵
Fauci’s lab leak coverup couldn’t have happened without the help of legacy media.
Do you remember how far outlets went to claim the lab leak was a conspiracy?
I’ve got the screenshots. ⤵️
Fauci’s lab leak coverup couldn’t have happened without the help of legacy media.
Do you remember how far outlets went to claim the lab leak was a conspiracy?
I’ve got the screenshots. ⤵️
Do you remember when @TomCottonAR was repeating a “fringe theory” that “scientists have dismissed”?
An explosive take for the dumb online rubes, right @nytimes?
An explosive take for the dumb online rubes, right @nytimes?
I think this tweet, from a former @nytimes science writer captures it well.
@heartsofpa1m Philly one still operating far as I know.. haven’t visually seen office building though
Did notice they changed their description in filings to include anyone new to Philly recently from just immigrants drive.google.com/file/d/1aKi_x9…
Did notice they changed their description in filings to include anyone new to Philly recently from just immigrants drive.google.com/file/d/1aKi_x9…
@heartsofpa1m Shipyard careers in #PHILLY 👀🫣🧐and AFL-CIO
Immigrants at our ports? Sounds like a national security issue possibly @DHSgov
Unions @FBIDirectorKash & @SecMullinDHS are clearly involved in hiring/training immigrants . @AFLCIO needs to be investigated.. taking citizens jobs
Immigrants at our ports? Sounds like a national security issue possibly @DHSgov
Unions @FBIDirectorKash & @SecMullinDHS are clearly involved in hiring/training immigrants . @AFLCIO needs to be investigated.. taking citizens jobs
@heartsofpa1m @DHSgov @FBIDirectorKash @SecMullinDHS @AFLCIO This is at the @welcomingcenter in Philly .. look at all their donors, govt contracts and funding for immigrants
1/11
Defending Dr. Anthony Fauci does not require believing he was infallible.
It requires judging him as we should judge every public servant: by the complete record, the evidence available at the time, the limits of his authority—and not by a conspiracy narrative constructed backward from political resentment.
A thread on a lifetime of public service:
#AbthinyFauci
Defending Dr. Anthony Fauci does not require believing he was infallible.
It requires judging him as we should judge every public servant: by the complete record, the evidence available at the time, the limits of his authority—and not by a conspiracy narrative constructed backward from political resentment.
A thread on a lifetime of public service:
#AbthinyFauci
2/11
Anthony Fauci grew up in a working-class Italian-American family in Brooklyn. His father was a pharmacist, and as a boy Fauci delivered prescriptions by bicycle.
After Regis High School, he studied classics and premedicine at Holy Cross, earned his medical degree from Cornell in 1966 and joined the NIH in 1968.
He would remain in federal service for 54 years.
Anthony Fauci grew up in a working-class Italian-American family in Brooklyn. His father was a pharmacist, and as a boy Fauci delivered prescriptions by bicycle.
After Regis High School, he studied classics and premedicine at Holy Cross, earned his medical degree from Cornell in 1966 and joined the NIH in 1968.
He would remain in federal service for 54 years.
3/11
Long before COVID made him a household name, Fauci was an accomplished physician-scientist.
His early research helped develop highly effective treatments for devastating inflammatory diseases, including forms of vasculitis that had frequently been fatal.
He was not merely a television spokesperson. He was a practicing clinical investigator whose work changed patient care.
Long before COVID made him a household name, Fauci was an accomplished physician-scientist.
His early research helped develop highly effective treatments for devastating inflammatory diseases, including forms of vasculitis that had frequently been fatal.
He was not merely a television spokesperson. He was a practicing clinical investigator whose work changed patient care.
1/ Russia's Navy, Marines, and non-strategic nuclear forces are in a dire state, according to Russian warbloggers. They are angry that the Navy has announced a huge, expensive, and likely useless unmanned surface vessel (USVs) while ignoring many other problems. ⬇️
2/ The USV announcement by Admiral Aleksandr Moiseyev on Sunday has caused widespread confusion and criticism among warbloggers, who point to the more urgent need to develop large numbers of capable USVs to counter those of Ukraine.
3/ 'Mine Division', a Telegram channel which focuses on the Russian Navy, demands to know:
"A logical question arises: what could Moiseyev have done as Supreme Commander? Actually, a hell of a lot (and some had an "unhealthy optimism" about him)..."
"A logical question arises: what could Moiseyev have done as Supreme Commander? Actually, a hell of a lot (and some had an "unhealthy optimism" about him)..."
Takviye endüstrisi, vücudun tüm ihtiyaçlarını tek bir sentetik "multivitamin" hapıyla karşılayabileceğiniz illüzyonunu pazarlar.
Multivitaminlerin çoğu şifa değil; hücre reseptörlerini kilitleyen, birbirinin emilimini bloke eden, sentetik siyanür ve oksitlenmiş demirle ++
Multivitaminlerin çoğu şifa değil; hücre reseptörlerini kilitleyen, birbirinin emilimini bloke eden, sentetik siyanür ve oksitlenmiş demirle ++
karaciğeri boğan moleküler trafik kazasıdır. Büyük popülasyon taramaları yüksek dozda sentetik multivitamin kullanan kişilerde ölüm oranlarında, kalp damar hastalıklarında veya kanser riskinde hiçbir olumlu gelişme olmadığını; aksine bazı durumlarda bu takviyelerin mortaliteyi ++
artırdığını göstermektedir. Beden, aynı anda 30 farklı vitamini ve minerali sentezleyemez.
Aynı hapın içindeki Çinko ile Bakır, Kalsiyum ile Demir aynı reseptör için savaşır. Çoğu birbirini nötralize eder ve vücutta serbest radikal yangını başlatır.
Erkeklerin ve menopoz ++
Aynı hapın içindeki Çinko ile Bakır, Kalsiyum ile Demir aynı reseptör için savaşır. Çoğu birbirini nötralize eder ve vücutta serbest radikal yangını başlatır.
Erkeklerin ve menopoz ++
@FrancoisCame C'est à cela qu'on voit la tendance politique et subjectivité de l'auteur d'un message^^
Les valeurs de Condorcet n'ont rien "de "gauche" ; Républicain mais plus Démocrate que le Jacobin (Gauche radicale à PS) Robespierre qui était plutôt "populiste".
1/n
Les valeurs de Condorcet n'ont rien "de "gauche" ; Républicain mais plus Démocrate que le Jacobin (Gauche radicale à PS) Robespierre qui était plutôt "populiste".
1/n
@FrancoisCame Robespiere "populiste" en prétendant défendre et donner la parole au Peuple (typique des Extrêmes), tout en donnant en réalité le pouvoir à un entre-soi !
2/n
2/n
@FrancoisCame C'est donc vrai à 99% sauf que… Condorcet était "girondin" (Centre/LR Républicaine & Centre), fédéraliste donc, serait aujourd'hui de LR, Centre ou Renaissance, et serait donc plutôt "Horizons" ou Macroniste aujourd'hui.
3/n
3/n
It's nice to see the US National Security establishment in July 2026 _FINALLY_ getting around to putting in print what I was writing about between April 2023 and Nov-Dec 2024.
Drone Revolution vs DC elites 🧵
1/
Drone Revolution vs DC elites 🧵
1/
April 2023:
How drones have made Western intervention light infantry obsolete.
2/
How drones have made Western intervention light infantry obsolete.
2/
January 2024:
“Distributed computing means distributed area denial military power in the age of drones.
We saw this in Armenia in 2020… Ukraine since Feb 2022… and… Yemen in 2024.”
3/
“Distributed computing means distributed area denial military power in the age of drones.
We saw this in Armenia in 2020… Ukraine since Feb 2022… and… Yemen in 2024.”
3/
1/
הכנת שרימפס בחמאה שום / שרימפס סקמפי בבית:
דבר ראשון בחירת חומר הגלם, נבחר שרימפס קפוא מקולף ו*לא מבושל*.
מבחינת גודל לדעתי XL 26/30 נותן תמורה טובה לכסף.
ג'מבו אם יש מבצע, Large גם יעבוד, אבל לא כדאי קטן מזה או מזה.
שקית חצי קילו מכילה 400 גרם שזו אחלה מנה זוגית וגם
הכנת שרימפס בחמאה שום / שרימפס סקמפי בבית:
דבר ראשון בחירת חומר הגלם, נבחר שרימפס קפוא מקולף ו*לא מבושל*.
מבחינת גודל לדעתי XL 26/30 נותן תמורה טובה לכסף.
ג'מבו אם יש מבצע, Large גם יעבוד, אבל לא כדאי קטן מזה או מזה.
שקית חצי קילו מכילה 400 גרם שזו אחלה מנה זוגית וגם
2/
נכנס בנוחות במחבת 28 שלרובנו יש בבית.
נפשיר את השרימפס:
כמה שעות על השיש או כמה דקות בקערה עם מים, אפשר גם יום במקרר.
בכל מקרה להניח אותם על נייר מגבת לייבוש.
התיבול:
20 גרם חמאה
4 גרם מלח (קצת פחות מכפית)
חצי כפית אבקת שום (אפשר גם טרי)
חצי כפית אבקת בצל
גרדה מחצי לימון
נכנס בנוחות במחבת 28 שלרובנו יש בבית.
נפשיר את השרימפס:
כמה שעות על השיש או כמה דקות בקערה עם מים, אפשר גם יום במקרר.
בכל מקרה להניח אותם על נייר מגבת לייבוש.
התיבול:
20 גרם חמאה
4 גרם מלח (קצת פחות מכפית)
חצי כפית אבקת שום (אפשר גם טרי)
חצי כפית אבקת בצל
גרדה מחצי לימון
3/
שמינית כפית אבקת צ'ילי
כמה עלי מרווה אם יש לכם
אפשר לשחק עם פרופיל הטעמים ולקחת את זה לאן שרוצים.
להמיס את החמאה ולהוסיף את הטיבול ולערבב היטב
להוסיף את השרימפס ולבשל על חום בינוני כשתי דקות לכל צד.
כשהם כבר לא חצי שקופים להוציא לצלחת הגשה.
הסוד פה הוא לא לבשל אותם יותר מדי
שמינית כפית אבקת צ'ילי
כמה עלי מרווה אם יש לכם
אפשר לשחק עם פרופיל הטעמים ולקחת את זה לאן שרוצים.
להמיס את החמאה ולהוסיף את הטיבול ולערבב היטב
להוסיף את השרימפס ולבשל על חום בינוני כשתי דקות לכל צד.
כשהם כבר לא חצי שקופים להוציא לצלחת הגשה.
הסוד פה הוא לא לבשל אותם יותר מדי