Youtube comments of (@CYMotorsport).
-
16000
-
12000
-
8000
-
6400
-
6300
-
6300
-
5300
-
4700
-
4400
-
4000
-
3600
-
3100
-
2700
-
2300
-
2100
-
1900
-
1800
-
1800
-
1500
-
1500
-
1400
-
1400
-
1300
-
1300
-
1200
-
1200
-
970
-
920
-
887
-
880
-
835
-
819
-
809
-
798
-
773
-
761
-
759
-
715
-
707
-
676
-
649
-
645
-
613
-
586
-
530
-
519
-
513
-
485
-
476
-
447
-
424
-
303
-
279
-
278
-
278
-
265
-
219
-
209
-
203
-
183
-
180
-
176
-
176
-
175
-
167
-
164
-
160
-
159
-
158
-
152
-
148
-
143
-
135
-
125
-
123
-
121
-
115
-
113
-
105
-
100
-
93
-
3 things to add to the first story that I think make this feel all but solved atleast IMO. 1. Quakerism & Pendle Hill 2. Her father's mission work 3. Her Montessori degree
The first 2 are wrapped in eachother. You correctly touched on the religious aspect of her life but this is pretty important because her parents werent just casual Western Christians... the split you reference was her father being closer to a missionary but the kind of evangelist who does the literally "building" work in small nations or ones where the gospel isn't even known. One belief of note that her mother and father starkly deviated was homosexuality and her father's staunch belief in favor of "biblical morality" without "compromise with sexual deviance". After their divorce, her mother went to not just any compound, but Pendle Hill. Which is a well established Quaker Mecca of sorts. Interestingly, Quakerism is a bit split on homosexuality. Atleast it's not as clear cut as her father's position. Which is notable because it was confirmed in a New Yorker article in 2018 that had heavy involvement with her mother and it seems very thorough and credible that Hannah was dating a woman as early as her junior year at Bryn Mawr. Most reports only cite her graduation from Pace but that was graduate school. She went to Bryn though which is important because of it's ties to Quakerism and also her possible developing sexuality.
When you add on her trips to see her father while also spending time with her mother at Pendle Hill where she also worked by the way, you can imagine how one might be EXTREMELY torn in their personality with this aspect of their life extremely divided by her parents no less who don't even speak to eachother. You cant be half committed to the life either parent was living. And Hannah was stuck in the middle. Which is complicated by the aforementioned relationship - only relevant to point to the kind of stress one would be under. she usually took these trips to see her father in the summer or during breaks. The interesting thing for me is this first incident was her 2nd year teaching at Thurgood, not her first. so the first day jitters wouldn't have applied here. she's already experienced this. However, imo something could have changed in her personal life. I also think it's possible she made a trip to see her father before but I can't 100% confirm this however this would make perfect sense. add on the stress of a new year, it could have easily put her over the top and into fugue. I actually think this is very credible. You mention she "checked" her email at the apple store but police confirmed she never actually read an email. so she either stared at the screen scanning email subjects or did it as a habit of muscle memory which i think the latter is more likely. So a fugue here seems highly credible. Also worth noting - this was the EXACT same time as the major stock market crash. no one ever mentions that for some reason. she's literally in the financial capital of the world. I was worked on a high yield & a high grade bond desk at that time - sht was insane. her world would be upside down at this time in september 2008. it
Her 2nd disappearance would be much of the same. This was the first day of work away from Pendle Hill & her support structure. I'm not sure what reports you saw mention it being prestigious but still it would be HIGHLY stressful especially bc for some reason taking the job in Maryland. I would imagine she would stay near to a support structure. She seemed to be constant in a fight for change away from her traumatic event which may have potentially provided the exact kind of fuel to trigger it again. Which appears happened in her second fugue state.
As for her third, this is where #3 comes into play. This is when she proved she could successfully negotiate such a major change in her life but keep in mind she wasn't head teacher in St. Thomas.She only just finished her degree to do so that summer so now she's be able to lead her own class in the Montessori system. So it seemed as she aged she became much better equipped to handle the stress. she showed up for the first day, then the first week no problem. it wasn't only until Force majeure would kick off the next and final fugue: an act of god so profoundly unlucky in the form of consecutive hurricanes in Irma and Maria. When add you in the fact that she was likely already under a lot of pressure and stress to finally make this work with the weight of a class on her shoulders (montessori's system are unique to teaching in normal schools and she was a huge believer in the system), the devastation of Irma and maria would add immense pressure because keep in mind - this place had essentially changed her and in many ways saved her from her previous fear of losing herself. she didn't want to leave. in fact the investigation showed she spoke to an ex who was ferrying ppl to safety and she told him directly she was can't leave. But she certainly should have.
One last thing i found interesting picking this back up was Barbara told The New Yorker journalist something she hadn't mentioned before which was she herself had actually experienced what her daughter is experiencing when she got her divorce - disassociating for a much shorter time but the event she described is powerful. I found that fascinating and something i'lll likely look at later. thanks for re-opening this! hard to explain how much this gripped new york around this time. I was there actually and this was in the midst of that crash and it still grabbed headlines!
93
-
90
-
87
-
86
-
86
-
85
-
81
-
79
-
78
-
77
-
77
-
72
-
72
-
69
-
68
-
68
-
65
-
63
-
62
-
61
-
59
-
58
-
58
-
56
-
55
-
54
-
53
-
53
-
52
-
50
-
48
-
47
-
47
-
46
-
46
-
44
-
44
-
44
-
44
-
43
-
42
-
40
-
4:20 there's just many of these little moments where he says these things with such conviction, you don't really think about it. but quite a few times he's been objectively incorrect. They did "save their bacon". That is specifically why Cpt. Thomas P. Mulvey was relieved of his command. F fell, exposing D, with the Eagles left to defend alone. He somehow correctly identifies this chain of events yet claims the 29th infantry and 5 dozen tanks from Com Command A didn't offer resolution to the retreat which only just had been rectified. The counterattack alleviated that pressure leading to German withdraw and more critically, bridged the link of Omaha and Utah forces.
Another good example is 1:43. Not sure what he was thinking here aside from maybe he heard someone else incorrectly say it combined with I don't think he actually watched the full scene. But there are PLENTY of depictions that prove what happened here was correct. Captain Ralph Goranson along with many captains had to coordinate with ships re: their location. They would be using radio operators via "shore party". What's not shown in this specific video and is editing incorrectly is the fact that Hanks is on radio & declared "CATF" twice. But Goranson's shore party counterpart was KIA. Thus, he had to pick up radio and communicate position. He certainly wasn't speaking to CATF. but it's never depicted as such. in fact, the radio doesn't even work. he isn't able to make that call. BUT had the radio not been shot, that would have been the correct thing to do to report position should radio operators be unavailable with the CATF call simply to be relayed properly. He wasn't "talking" to anyone. Ironically his own confusion is an excellent portrayal of the hectic nature of the combined landing assault in some areas.
& the ones he's gotten very right, he's literally used verbatim verbiage from other videos much like this - e.g., the "School of thought" sequence re: Fury. I mean, there were a couple full sentences impressively identical to Moran's video you did a few months back. Unsolicited reco: consider giving talking points that you don't need condescend and correct the film to substantiate your historian title. You can correct sure but the point could be more focused on how to elaborate further on well documented pieces of the film.
38
-
36
-
35
-
35
-
33
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
30
-
29
-
29
-
28
-
28
-
27
-
24
-
23
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
Pretty despicable sentiment. You can count the number of Vietnam Purple Heart awardees put to death on one hand bc of the extent of their crime. Such a gross conflation of trauma with violence that’s well into territory of irresponsible. In the very least, the most empathetic would admit it’s just not that simple. Bc it’s not. Even what we know right this very second drawing on the creasing number of peer reviewed pieces, ptsd in and of itself would not and should not result in a stay. It has to do with the incident and the mental state at the time. Mate I’m going to give you the benefit of the doubt here. There’s simply no way you did research on this case before typing this. It’s one I’ve poured over for the better part of a year. And I have plenty of blind spots on the literature. But if you truly feel this way, I encourage you to go read the dissenting words from the testifying experts from the state too. I will grant you that yes it’s possible he was in the midst of a manic or fugue state while committing the murder. However, reasonably the flip side is haunting to put it mildly. Shouting im a Vietnam combat veteran while you empty your Carbine doesn’t exactly clear him of wrong doing. Neither does approaching a downed uniform officer pleading , screaming, and slowly having to watch this man he spared plenty of times approach him after hitting him 9 separate times pause to reload, then execute him point blank. Brennan was suffering. And by most definitions he was not mentally well all the time. But mentally unwell veterans murdering police offers routine traffic stops is impossibly rare. Veterans from Vietnam did not all get the treatment they needed. And some had incidents directly related to their trauma. A jury heard the evidence including Brennan’s defense and determined at that very moment his ptsd was not gripping him to the point of him unable to cognizant control his own will. We have every single word uttered and action on video. Many experts opined on his behavior and a case was made that accepts two realities: PTSD has consequences if left untreated or progresses. A troubled man is not the same as an individual disassociating. Brennan displayed many actions and said multiple things that imo personally made that clear. If that reality is true, which courts determined so, it means you’d also graciously speak on the hundreds of thousands of veterans who came back traumatized and turned to murder. Brannan never debated his veteran status. In fact he reminded the officer as he cut him down. Now unarmed and screaming in agony, you contend brannan simply couldn’t help himself. But I think you’re wrong. The mountain of evidence and testimony points a gruesome other narrative. So i agree to disagree sir. Im not concerned with where he ended up. His anguish was indeed real and his road to recovery steep. But the deviation he took he chose to. I’m comfortable condemning cold blooded murder while recognizing the nuance of tragedy . The lines get blurred often in cases like these. Such as the other handful in the next decades served on the front lines and in tunnels. But contrast those cases. While veterans mental health has not been all successful, our ability to understand behavior in 2015 and this illness has been increasingly more successful with just as many overturned cases. He ruthlessness murdered an innocent man. His mind and spirit were here. Firmly in control and command like the tactical grip he operated his carbine with while putting an officer down sight after displaying he understood the nuance of deadly force from the officer. And in a bid to escalate the engagement, he stalked, reloaded and executed a man. His lost comrades rest peace dying in combat doing their job. If there’s a better place for him to join them, I hope he’s not sharing that honor. But I do hope the family found peace.
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
A challenge to the logic here of Anakin’s story but not relevant to the point at large:
I believe you have the lessons of Anakin wrong. Rather than a tale of patience and not taking the shortcut, Anakin’s is far more about bureaucracy and the complexities of war. As a prequel defender, I notice often ppl who dont pay close enough attention to the first episodes often miss the subtleties of what Lucas was doing by leveraging the political nature of that era. The fact remains no matter how you slice it, his superiors failed him.
Right out the gates the council violated their own rules taking him in at that age knowing they had limits for this exact reason. OWK failed in his duty to keep an even closer eye on him knowing he was a major risk given his talents and also he missed out on early teachings before bad patterns set in. It’s ludicrous to suggest he took the “fast” road as well.
Anakin was training for nearly an entire dozen years prior to his heroic behavior in Clone Wars. Compare that to Luke. And here’s why that matters and how it cuts against your narrative:
Anakin wasn’t just expecting the world bc he was impatient. That’s being ignorant to the entirety of The Clone Wars. He earned the right to be on that council given it governed the affairs of the Jedi which he had MORE than proven he was a contributing member of.
In that time, there was open conflict requiring generals which no doubt prompted a speedy promotion…but he was also The Chosen One. Given his approximate age of 19, his advancing at The Clone Wars would rank him among the youngest knighted Jedi but it was not in vain. Yoda trusted anakin to protect Padme on his first assignment. He also emerges Geonosis as a small number of Jedi not killed, which was roughly 90% who entered.
It’s also interesting Mace was the biggest challenger to Anakin reaching the council and I’ve always felt George was trying to spark a sense of jealousy Windu himself had as he was famously the youngest council member. At that point, Anakin indeed had proven himself. There was zero reason his age should have limited him. But constantly being overlooked in spite of habitual over-performance led to distrust which led to him discounting his superiors and their lessons about how to control his emotions. Anakin was a product of a system that didn’t find a way to cultivate his talent and who he was to the galaxy and order. Contrast this to how Morpheus recruits, trains, and opens doors for NEO. These seeds be planted along with the freedom he gave him not only in combat but with major decisions lead to his revelatory moment that took him over the top. Imagine had Morpheus left NEO on the ship. Or didn’t consult him, despite him literally working an office desk job not too long ago. Again, Anakin had been under Obi for more than a decade. I’m not aware of any reference Anakin got the chance to train a padwan - one of the requirements for Master.
In fact, it’s the death of Qui-Gon Jinn that i believe sets these events into motion.It directly results in his promotion in order to train Anakin, a task far over the head of such a new Master training the Chosen One. The victory over Darth Maul is the stated reason for his promotion. Now imagine you’re Anakin, who helped him win that mind you. Obi gets his shit rocked by Dooku… twice. Then Anakin proves himself in battle as a general, has the skill to beat Dooku, but never promoted. George was telling us The Council’s ability to promote their own talent was flawed. But this “senator” recognized his power. It’s compelling, really. And makes sense his fall. The politics and war are meant to be a backdrop to explain the weakness of systems that govern not just men, but the Jedi Order.
Thus I argue it’s this miscarriage of Anakin’s rise within the rank as THE chosen Jedi along with favoritism for the likes of “old guard” apprentices especially Obi who was promoted under less than ideal circumstances that leads to poor training to an already at risk, highly skilled, highly capable young knight-to-be with bad habits.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@Steveyboii normally I wouldn’t wade in, but your comment went unchecked and thus you’ll think it was a totally fair position.
It was not.
The objection you most vividly addressed was the creative decision to show Castro with a cigar while Kennedy & khrushchev sat “dignified at the table”. This criticism is at the root of the sentiment of your entire comment so I’ll focus on this otherwise this comment would be far too lengthy.
Your comment is in bad faith regarding this depiction, which I assume was at 15:24 but you failed to capture that so forgive me if that assumption is wrong. It’s clear it bothered you how the two looked “dignified” sitting at a table but pay closer attention… they were doing more than that: do you remember what that part of the script was talking about? It was an objectively true explanation of the scenario. They were playing chess… you conveniently left that out. it was an analogy… do you see? Just because you hear something you don’t like that may appear to be negative, doesn’t disqualify it from being relevant information that ultimately speaks to the motives of each party. In fact, it’s quite important we understand how khrushchev was playing two hands at once. Had this very specific moment not been depicted, it actually would have been irresponsible given it was what happened and why things ended as they did. Cuba was a pawn in war games. And no one says that with glee. I’m sure the armchair team take no pleasure detailing the historic events of how Cuba was used in a larger Cold War. I’m sure they feel nothing at all. Bc it’s reality. A reality that ultimately led to the disillusionment of Castro once the US deployed the U-2 to get photo evidence. The fact that the two leaders were dealing without Castro was arguably the driving force behind later monumental decisions and set him on a path to things like Angola, the Non-Aligned Movement leadership, and finally having to contend with his pseudo ally capable of betrayal entering the Non-Aligned Movement nation of Afghanistan.
Now, what I will grant you is if you don’t watch the channel often then it’s possible you interpreted the “Cuban perspective” to be the daily life of citizens and motivations of different peoples within. But as with nearly all the videos on this channel I’ve seen, it’s from the eyes of Cuba from an executional standpoint in terms of military operations. But this is why I said your comment about the creative depiction underlines the whole issue here.
Your expectation was not in line with how this channel chooses to focus on military strategy and tactics. The video is not titled “from the Cuban citizen perspective”. Anyone who habitually watches the channel knew exactly what this video would explore. For instance, the video didn’t address some of the things culturally you referenced. But then again to achieve its objective of focusing on tactical movements, that wasn’t mission critical. He indeed accurately addressed Castro’s belief that the US were imperialist war mongers that expected enemies to not push back. HE DID NOT Diminish that or make it seem foolish. He spoke about the motivations of Castro. But we all know what happened: you can’t artificially inflate decision retroactively bc it’s from a certain “perspective”. Gorbachev’s pairing of perestroika and glasnost was the final blow leaving Castro holding a $6 billion/year bust. No matter your perspective, this was a losing hand and the context of how such a massive collapse came to be was a tricky set of nuance decisions, often much like the very scene you seem to take such great offense with.
It doesn’t make you wrong. Nor does it make the team who made this “right”. Unless you have inaccuracies specially you’d like to cite, of course. But it does mean you expected something never promised. And then you chose to unfairly weaponize that against creative choices that could be justified - just not copacetic to your wishes. That’s the very definition of bad faith.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
11:50 usually a pretty clear warning flag for a suspect to refer to the person they are accused of killing in the past tense unprompted.
29:12 this is so hard to listen to. You are essentially asking your suspect to implicate themself. In his mind, if you know what happened, you wouldn’t be having this conversation. It would stand to reason based on this that you need something from him that results in handcuffs being put on. So anyone with decent intelligence will simply reciprocate the topic’s veiled toned with vague language. You’re asking him to go against his own self-preservation instincts with zero downside. There’s no establishing further details about what the suspect appears to be perfectly comfortable offering up.
He seems to think he’s a clever guy - let him tell you all about what it means for his father to put hands on him. Seems like physically removing him seated on a couch contradicts his own narrative that his father “put hands on him” last November.
Why would he not have him expand on his “virtual girlfriend”? He’s already admitted it’s “embarrassing” with no pressure. Why not focus on having him elaborate on why money is needed for her company, what is being purchased, how many others can do exactly this with her too , etc? He’s already also confirmed he understands why his father was upset with him when he said “I know what I did” re: his stealing. Why not have him spell out what exactly his father is upset? Capitalize on his mistake validating his own motive: not only did he steal from his parents, he lied to them despite knowing full well the consequences as laid out by his father. Then, instead of toothlessly asking him to “fill in the gaps” and dooming his own chances to get out of this, package up HIS own statements into a tidy sequence of events chronicling the timeline resulting in what amounts to a rhetorical situation where he doesn’t feel there’s any valid way to lie without accepting how terrible this looks. Then your implied threat, which was actually the correct one, that only you here & now can help him but if we walk out this is it, will have teeth.
He’s handed them a reasonable enough motive that removes his safety net he presumes he has via plausible deniability:
- Financially he’s unstable & struggled for work as things in his professional life are declining.
- was shameful how everyone around him was supporting him financially & the burden he was causing which again was his own sentiment he offered.
- was embarrassed about his “virtual girlfriend”. Which is why it was important to establish earlier the motivations behind this to recall organically here so it’s another reminder this isn’t the detectives’ narrative - it’s his own words.
- was publicly shamed about his having to go to his retreat. The suspect seemed to shun any notion he needed “help” likely meaning he saw this as taboo and understandably held a grudge given he again foolishly offered up it was against his own will and wishes.
- was being asked to end things “cold turkey” with the person he has feelings for and whom he admitted he’s stolen an enormous amount of money then lied about it.
- will financially be be cut off from not just his support system financially but the source of his “virtual girlfriend” tokens thus eliminating that relationship.
- was physically overpowered by his father and further shamed for his actions then removed from his home essentially forced with being homeless.
“You sure you didn’t go back to that house for anything..?”
2
-
The Walter story was one that interested me for a bit but as with some of the work covered by Paulides in his book(s) sourcing is not great. But the simple fact that we can name the instances someone went missing in a dense remote forest/ wilderness area is proof enough it’s not really THAT mysterious, I imagine some of the lore is from what you mentioned and there’s loosely, and I mean Loosely, some reference to geomagnetic disruptions in the region but that’s also not too dissimilar to mountainous regions with unexplored material. The one thing I never got over is his date missing sad always incorrect. Maybe small but if you can’t get that right how can the history of the events be trusted ya know? No one ever documented his disappearance well so if was late January and they got the day wrong simply, well then he managed to survive over four months in the woods alone. With no supplies. Absolutely 0% chance. Not happening.
So, he set out of course with other plans. He must have known who he was meeting: given his wife’s lack of mention of this for months, he was either prone to this extended absence or informed her though likely after that long she would have mentioned suspicion. keep in mind one thing you never mentioned ( or maybe I missed sorry if so), the Slovak state founded in march of 1939… DIRECTLY in his disappearance window. He was found in Zlaté Moravce and client state to Nazi germany. Try to imagine how mission critical espionage and counter spying was during this time… ESPECIALLY at factories. Bata shoe company has a bonafide connection to Birkenau and was convicted in US courts not aiding in Nazi resistance as was the figure head convicted in absentia.
Which is significant. The complicated history of someone like Agnelli contrasts nicely here not all companies just went along with Nazi occupation. And many openly defied them especially in military spaces like aircraft construction. But there was some protection of Jewish workers made that was also proven it must be said . Either way, the simple fact the nazis had a hand at Bata is what matters to this story.
Immediately upon existence this cleric state of the Slovak republic immediately had Jewish discrimination implemented. One would imagine at the factory Walter worked as well as the region he was found “spies” were needed aka snitches to the party. Walter would also be a prime person to use for any other low level operations on either side given he had a family and cover to be traveling frequently long distances across contested territory. I would bet my final dollar he was involved in some sort of active political operation, whether that be axis aligned or anti-Nazi. I would wager the former if I had to given he overtly set out on a trip that from the start makes zero sense. One would think he might be more considerate of his plans if he was planning to miss work but be discreet. His state and possible torture would make a bit of sense as it was 1939 a few months removed from kristallnacht but well before death camps. I still highly doubt if a suspected Jewish person he’d be alive at all or strong enough after capture to escape and survive just from the brutal conditions at the time. I would guess again wild speculation based on incomplete, unavailable sourcing Nazi sympathizers suspected him of double crossing or in the event he was a sympathizer himself, anti Nazi groups may be less inclined execute him but want any information he may have been passing to officials.
Anyways, the region was a considerable political hornets nest. By statistics alone I find it utterly impossible a military aged male could survive months in the coldest part of the year alone no supplies in a very critical region geopolitically between Austria and Poland in the general vicinity of Bratislava making suspicious day trips working for a Nazi aligned factory and NOT have some hand in the upheaval on either side of the political spectrum. It’s the one time where a strange disappearance I would say has this more “extravagant” tale where as 9/10 I personally would fail to see how a disappearance isn’t just someone starting over or unfortunately going out on their terms. Both are more common than we like to sometimes admit/accept.
Another interesting connection, well done sir - have a fantastic Sunday!
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@razz-8031 I’m 100% being overly critical. Unnecessarily one might argue. This isn’t an NTSB report after all. I concede that. But I wholly accept that criticism from a pilot then again I would bet my channel on its face to yourself on principle you wouldn’t disagree. To that end, it would feel pedantic but if you had to guess what % of folks had wings at any point? Gotta be pretty rare though not at all impossible. If I was just talking to you.. well it would be about 2 sentances long something to the effect of visibility and he had little documented experience or proficiency in those conditions. The rest was my diatribe subtly propping up good pilots. As you know the trope among pilots is pretty true in that flying is 99% unremarkable, albeit beautiful, and 1% sht your pants nerves & horror lol to that end there are plenty of professional career guys and gals with a perfect record. I know you’ve seen them. An absolute machine with checklists, safety, upkeep, airmanship, decision making, CRM, and overall judgement. A non pilot all too often includes rhetoric that would say someone is an expert less this major major major mistake haha and I’m not saying the creator did that bc his point was by all accounts that’s the image he portrayed which is still useful. But until I see Greg Feith call a pilot “a solid airman with good judgement” I’ll reserve judgement haha. You know how serious aviation takes every single incident. The mistakes by the pilot extend very very far beyond the safety pack but it’s that stuff that makes me double click which was my point. A pilot who forgets that might have some performance issues. Sure enough it led me to dig up the old report and the NTSB was pretty candid in the archived file. It was pilot error with mitigating factors. I just want to reserve the title of safe and quality pilot for the ones who do their basic job. While I def understand optically it seems harsh again you know this but missing keep on deicing systems even just the carb ice is hard to imagine when you’re habitually flying in cold conditions. The protocol is so well defined and laid out BECAUSE of accidents like that . And it was two pronged though I concede yes it seems like I’m picking on the survival pack which does irritate me however it was blended with the reporter pilot error and NTSB noting lack of qualifications and proper deployment of the carb heat. I won’t call him a bad guy of course or anything like that but there’s plenty of talented pilots that it would actually be pretty insulting to suggest they would make such mistakes. This is one of the rare industries I’m comfortable saying truly good pilots wouldn’t. This isn’t the MAX stab switch being out of reach or something it’s a known issue in a. Environment for a 100% fact he could have expected at some point ice . You’d think he’d overcompensate and be hyper qualified. Somehow the reverse.
I too stopped flying the v tail bonanza bc of pretty nerve racking incident I had one evening transitioning from VFR to IMC. In the back of my head was her reputation that I always tried to ignore but that day it was impossible. I got super lucky and structurally it held but a few more ICM incidents and mine would be just another Docter killer stat. I did miss something inspecting my leading edge in conjunction with having stumbled past the never exceed speed . I want to say the later models anchored the stab lead edge to the fuselage at the very root point but mine did not have this efficiency . I just stopped flying it requires too much vigilance than I could give despite what I thought. And a “good” pilot certainly wouldn’t have missed it. I take a lot of pride calling a pilot a quality airman . I wasn’t one. Not good enough and I had the resources to not fail there. I don’t want to condemn a subject so I appreciate you holding me accountable there but it’s just so common ppl might dress up a mistake but when you find yourself in a similar situation, if we’re not honest it might be a corner you find yourself cutting. Just bc I don’t actually see loads of ppl inspecting front spar lower hinge pins for corrosion doesn’t mean it’s not insane if I don’t do it. If we don’t call that out, someone might think no bigger. Or sure let’s descend below decision altitude . Just this once with no strip in sight. I’ve been co to this before and nearly lost my mind lol in the report atleast. It’s that kind of hyper attentive culture that actually is life saving. But you’re right for the sake of the story I do need to be more mindful of the environment I say something so I do sincerely appreciate that.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
6:18 I mean… you don’t know this mate. We can’t know this. It’s a pet peeve humans constantly assign human thinking to animals . Sometimes it’s true, but nuances might not. Eg it’s likely true they were so eager bc they heard a female. That can be applied broadly. To avoid humans? Notice how in all those copy paste articles no one ACTUALLY states how far that bridge was from where they entered the water at Queen Elizabeth to cross Kazinga. You see how long the bridge was? And how far the bridge exit was from their ultimate resting spot? Now compare the total distances. Idk why no one shows this.
Not to mention, which of course you know but it wasn’t mentioned, he’s missing a leg. That’s another nuance that’s not just down to innate. A human poacher literally removed his leg via a trap. Lions avoid danger, not humans. Use my feral colony I care for. After 5 years they mostly trust me, but not humans. Literally no humans could pet one of these truly feral cats. That’s a micro example not related to longitudinal behavior changes but it’s tangential related to Jacob’s story. The brothers would not avoid “humans” as much jn other places . You failed to mention for example the bridge is defended by the Uganda military. Think of the amount of vehicles soldiers weapons etc. that’s different than “human foot traffic”. It’s possible Jacob was simply avoiding the bridge as his ability to evade directionally was reduced to nil along with being bottlenecked. Atleast in the swim he had control on his movements as proven by the 2 previous abandoned attempt as they wisely clocked a croc in the water trailing them at one point.
People say a fed animals is dead. In my own personal limited experience with actually wild born feral cats, this is preposterous. It’s the extent this occurs is the issue. It could be done in a responsible way. I don’t coddle them and learned the best way to interfere. My structures to keep them safe and warm and feed still force them to run jump and also live their daily life. I don’t linger, I don’t play with them, and they in turn allow me to occasionally be around them without running while I fix or add on to the shelter or if I have to do some wound healing. And not always that. You have to really be irresponsible to have an animal lose its fear of normal danger to a human. And that’s what I hope we switch to adjusting. As Cesar Milan says, animals might be rehabilitating after traumatic or perilous events, but humans are the ones who need training. It’s often our behavior that negatively affects these animals. I could NEVER grab one of these cats. Unless I made clear why I was doing it through careful movements and often need to slow burn the desired outcome I want through subtle things. And I’m really grateful for not ruining their ability to be cats still as that’s where they thrive. They don’t want restrictions of domesticated life but sometimes require life saving help. It’s a balance humans struggle with. I can understand for these majestic creatures and ones people dedicate their lives too. I do get it.
But ultimately I love your love for these animals and while I disagree with the often assigning of human thinking, it’s fantastic someone is so passionate about their behavior genuinely to provide the alternative viewpoint. I don’t consume much nature content I live in the literal middle of no where woods (aka my strong disagreement on coyotes with you - I take it you don’t have livestock and haven’t seen them ravage your animals) but this is really the only nature content I can tolerate and it’s a good one each time. Cheers bruv
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Your mountaineering experience doesn’t qualify you to opine with authority on air freezing in your airways though you can speak anecdotally to the cold you felt internally. Did you measure this when it occurred to yourself? What were the circumstances? What mountaineering have you done in a few words and is it similar to the scenario depicted here? If not, how does that difference add credibility to what you’re saying? Not rhetorical , I think it can but need to know that before trusting the words after you establish yourself an experienced voice on the matter. I(we) don’t know and want to take that at face value but you’ve not provided information.
I say all that bc I’m studying the effects mentioned here and physiologically it’s illogical is the most gentle way I can put it. Your description has more plausible elements but how she recounts her story, I don’t think you were co-signing persay which makes sense. You said “feels” like and that I think that is perfectly reasonable. But medically speaking, sir it’s literally impossible unless EXTREME situation arises. Your lungs are literally encased entirely within your thoracic. You have an entire respiratory system that humidifies air before reaching your lungs. This could come down to what you mean by “crystallize” but taking it literally there’s a 0.001% this could occur in the presented scenarios. Again, that’s being generous. You would die LONG before this would be observed from hypothermia if “air was frozen in your airways” you said you could speak to. The very fact you’re coughing up blood in a consistent viscosity that was deemed normal is literally proof your ways aren’t frozen. Your lungs are heated by that same blood circulating which you claim you have also coughed. This circumstance with respect to the blood especially did not happen here whereby it can be attributed to frozen air in the airways. That doesn’t mean it’s some nerve agent. Though I think you are understandably trying to make sense of a situation that maybe didn’t occur as depicted but that wouldn’t be your fault. Like I said, it can be realistic for it to FEEL air is frozen in your airways. But that will not make you overheat and the two aren’t (can’t be) linked. Paradoxical undressing in another set of clinically understudied circumstances that may or may not apply here. But the concept of simply feeling “overheated” as you mention without the accompanying dubbed “terminal burrowing” behavior is fairly rare as most cases where it’s an accepted explanation that led to a death include the change in brain stem and body chemistry with the undressed deceased individual burrowed behind objects in cases where they are recovered or did not fall to their death. We just see the latter cases in movies of mountain climbers who are mid climb. But it happens mostly on open land atleast scientifically documented cases we can speak to with confidence. There’s no observable phenomena in any peer reviewed journal of a survivor having been confirmed to experience a provable or atleast documented feeling of “overheating” with no other action taken that would qualify the event as “paradoxical” in the first place. Meaning, if you say you’re hot when it’s cold and you do nothing, that doesn’t medically mean much. Atleast nothing of note. It’s strange, could be placebo, could be suggestive. But certainly doesn’t prove anything.
Net, taking the words literally, air does not freeze in airways of a person still conscious and breathing with any amount of faculties especially with circulating blood. And these circumstances described it happened to nearly every person actually would almost suggest strongly on its own there’s another factor as independently that’s a near impossibility for medical defying symptoms to present in an organized way like this. I believe you when you said it feels like your air is frozen. But it’s physically not possible. And thus the blood is not a symptom of that impossibility. The point isn’t to object to YOUR statements sir, all due respect. The point is to object the original story’s sequence of events. Not malice implied on the original story as I believe whatever happened was tragic but this was likely not what happened, and that last part is definitely in my opinion if it ever had to be stated clearly. If we part ways with her narrative, and go with the more reasonable autopsies which aren’t even noteworthy enough to consider conspiracies, the scenario gets FAR more believable. Basically, if we pretend this account of the lone survivor as an exercise in thought simply doesn’t exist, nothing terribly strange occurred. Though bodies were in partial disrobed states, it’s not necessarily paradoxically undressing instances. There were other factors that made this conclusion valid. But it was described credibly in my opinion as being death by hypothermia or some cases starvation/exposure. The implications of that are gruesome of course but again if again as a thought exercise assume that’s true, we also have a plethora of studied incidents where as a defense mechanism our brains concoct a story which we are able to cope with the reality of our survival in a very abnormal brain processing event and variation of survivors guilt. Where it can be objectively proven what we think happen can be in good faith but not even be close to accurate. There’s a very very complex hierarchy in literally with many paths ranging from aforementioned survivors guilt to defensive omnipotent phantasy. The non-depressive defensive categories are of interest to me here as they are hard to apply to life and death scenarios. One highly theorized incident is that of Luttrell’s survival in the Korangal Valley as there’s quite a bit of evidence of things not being quite as they are popularly depicted and I’m not talking in cinema. I’m not saying I believe that but that is another scenario of survival but on more related note, there’s a less popular but equally interesting accounts from the hyper confusing 2008 k2 incident particularly of the story from Confortola. It’s an uncomfortable reality we have to consider these scenarios but they are apart of human survival and how our brains operate. Is it possible that story about head bashing which wasn’t observed along with blood just spontaneously extracted, which also was inconstant with the established state of the bodies, was true? Meaning the autopsies were outright falsified? Yes, that’s possible. But for what motive? And what evidence supports that specifically? Or is it also possible as a defense mechanism to cope with needing to potentially abandon a hiking expedition in a life and death situation to survive the human brain created a narrative that made this an acceptable outcome? Not that I’m commenting in any way on whether that’s “right or wrong” just what’s possible. All I can say is it’s not a psychological impossibility.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I just struggle with these bc saying you’re a “former CIA agent” can mean many things but it’s highly unlikely it’s what people picture. More than likely he’s got a history degree or foreign language a degree in Middle East/East Asian history. Atleast the handful of government employees in intelligent I know do. Seems like a trend. Highly knowledgeable, capable people. No doubt. But does that make any of them experts on breaking down Tom cruise anymore than the person reading this? Honestly not really. Someone like Alex Honnold breaking down Tom cruise scaling Burj or something now THAT is excellent.
To be fair it’s not implied he was a Jason Bourne type but that’s indeed what picture when I’d bet my life he probably was just in the national clandestine services which has divisions such as tech support, HUMINT, special activities, info ops, counterintelligence, counter terror, etc. not discrediting at all, but if he WAS the Jason Bourne type, yes it makes everything he says a lot more interesting. The video should have touched on that a bit more. I’d like to know was he counterintel? Was he simply a case worker? And yes, you certainly can disclose that level of info. If you couldn’t, he wouldn’t be showing his face or saying he’s ex cia. Unless the video is covering fairly nuanced films that focus on hyper specific elements of cia ops, I have no way of knowing he has any real experience in any of these fields. It’s like having a “solder” break down special forces movies . Just bc you’re in the military doesn’t mean you’re knowledgeable on special forces. And just bc you’re a marine doesn’t make you knowledgeable on green beret tactics. Not sure how being in the cia means someone can meaningful dissect Ethan Hunt’s activities haha. Though, I’d love to see Andrew talk about something like ‘bridge of spies’ and ‘body of lies’. This really comes down to movie selection.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
lol the amount of over correction in the comments is genuinely terrifying. It’s a predator. If food is scare, and it’s the right shark, your life is in danger. Circumstances dependent, like anything. They won’t want to eat you. And statistically the amount that ignore you makes it incredibly unlikely. But it’s prudent to not trust a curious bull shark to check it out. Much like how I wouldn’t let random dogs approach my pit bull on a walk. I trust. It’s the other dog I don’t trust to not react in a poor way or be untrained and make both dogs skittish triggering aggression.
Saying it’s less likely than dying by falling coconut is propaganda put forth I imagine by oceanic white tips themselves. Go ahead and hop in the water at sea with a wide roaming shark like the white tip. They flock to our boat just to check out the commotion when we pick a spot after a while. Opportunistic predators are the ones you need to be vigilant of. No one said demonize them of course I’m with you there but their danger isn’t misunderstood just the risk of an encounter is - and an aggressive one at that.
As a lifelong surfer, I’ve seen many and especially the uniquely frightening white tip while big wave surfing which I no longer leave the boat opting to watch ppl far more brave from safety. Sharks are r idiots. They won’t check out creatures in a cage or atleast waste too much energy. Unless you purposefully chum the water which wisely you didn’t. That o saw atleast. Plenty of sharks could care less about you, but the deeper you go or even depending on what part of the world, it’s a numbers game until you happen across one hungry enough to put you on the menu. If hungry enough and if the right kind, they will treat you exactly like they do other marine mammals. The chances of you stumbling on a hungry roaming one are tiny. You will not see surfers saying sharks aren’t worrisome be mindful of imbalance in your ecosystem or area where you are. If you can, do you homework before dropping in for a meaningful amount of time. This imbalance is nature in that area of the ocean you are in is what will drive a change in risk you should be aware of . As a surfer, I commonly keep surfing after seeing a shark, depending on type. It’s likely they aren’t hunting. And certainly not me. If I see them and I’m still alive, they’ve long clocked me and passed. So long as you don’t magically morph into a different form or unfortunately bc of happens confuse the shark say it you’re paddling, you’ll be alright. bc chances are, there’s SOME type of shark nearby regardless. If that scares you, don’t get in. Bc it’s inevitable. But don’t be an idiot and think they make squeaky noises. Or be fooled by clips of cage diving amongst a shiver. Metal is even less appealing to a shark than human. Different ball game floating around. Just be aware. Your most common you’ll likely actually see is a bull. If you can get out get out. But shark are much less likely to care about you if you’re sent splashing around being sketchy. Any that roam toward me in the past usually turn and dart off the moment you face them calm. They truly don’t want to mess with you. And again it if it’s a white tip and you’re in deeper water or something aggressive even for a shark and they are hungry, well there’s nothing you can do anyway
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Yeah the bear thing is weird, I’ve personally known someone to survive a brown and another survive a black. For starters none of it matters in life and death scenarios regardless. And I’m sure you cover it at some point a little further maybe, but if this is just territory dispute, that’s a whole different ball game than if you’re predatory time. This entire comment assumes predatory. Bc territorial if you’re dumb enough to tip toe in the woods and startle a bear while being up wind of it, you won’t perform under pressure anyways. We fall to the level of our training. Which for normal ppl is nil. The color shit didn’t matter. It was simply the size end of story. Both were lucky enough to walk away..figuratively, atleast. My friend limped away from black bear with mostly broken arm and hand bones. It knocked him over and he used his arms to block his face swinging and spraying wildly. But he had a knife and spray. They changes things if you don’t. As you said, there’s still something to protecting organs. The issue is it implies it’s stopping the bear from overpowering you. Like lol who the f do ppl think they are their rubber guard holds off an Old God - even a diminutive black bear. It’ll flip you NO PROBLEM if it wants. My other friend was in a tree with a bow. And bastard knocked him out and stood over him only broke his ribs literally walking ON him. I guess they like to trample prey sometimes? Just a short drag comedically by the pant leg after he fell and broke his ankle .. not even biting his flesh. And the claws got him on the swipe . 5 minutes later he opened his eyes alone. Brown bears get bored with their prey. IF THEY aren’t hungry. As you mentioned, if they are, you could be rotting it doesn’t matter. Playing dead is so dumb. The bigger the bear, the more dominant they are. A black bear doesn’t haven’t the luxury of playing with its food. It eats everything it kills. And it takes more work. They are smaller with less(er) offensive weapons compared to their brown cousins. But we’ve only got black bears near me and I’ve come across animals with a drag path that clearly made it a few dozen yards after a mauling . The black bear didn’t eat it. The one I’ve seen in passing was enormous. The largest black I’ve ever seen hence my conjecture. The larger the bear, the more luxury Alex predictors have to “enjoy” hunts that have become so easy to them. It’s just that normally black bears are so much smaller they don’t get cheap meals. I’ll tie this back into natures most interest murderer: the feral cat.
If you’ve ever spent years getting to know truly feral cats (not strays) they will let you watch them hunt. I live on land with bears and cats. And cats act more like grizzlies. They will paw at mice and larger rodents maiming them so they can limp away only to chase it. I have to sometimes use my SP5 or simply a bow to mercy assist an animal. Can listen to them torture and maim animals bc they are bored. The smaller rodents they dispatch with ease I’ve noticed except the field mouse. Somehow this mouse is a fuckin genius and sits very very still. The cats ADD looks away constantly and just wants to chase it down and claw it to shreds only to repeat until dead. This goes on for hours for rabbit for example (literally horrible to hear but that’s nature). The mouse will wait and sometimes even kinda limp as the cat lets hurt animals limp further from it to make it fun. Then it BOLTS and the cat loses track. That or it hears something else and wanders off forgetting if the mouse was smart enough to never move in the first place. Risky but cats are the best hunters I’ve seen: they are not wanting for food.
The point of all this bull shit is to say brown bears in my highly highly limited and one layer removed exposure reminds me of feral cats. The theme atleast logically rings true for the Kodiak variety as well. Even a small “playful” swat from a bear closer to the behemoth polar than a grizzly you’re capital F fcked. A Kodiak bear yeets you if it’s interested on sheer size alone so laying down just makes it more swift. Bears normally don’t want to kill you. A black bear is my height or about the average man’s height you’re entirely overmatched but atleast you’re atleast as big. Imagine something the size of KD standing across from you but built like a prime Dwight Howard. Idgaf black or brown you lay down you die. If it knocks you down and you’re conscious enough to realize it’s losing interest, again black or brown, roll with it. Until you have something to return the favor in kind with parity lethality. If it’s gnawing on you we don’t have anyone coming back to guide us with wisdom so don’t die like a btch and atleast shoot your shoot. Black brown, white…. If it’s chewing, good night. Stay in your feet until thats no longer available at the bears discretion. Then your next best best is pray you’re calm enough under pressure and to gauge the bears intent. Plenty of ppl attacked by average sized bears of both have survived and I’ve yet to read a single instance someone proactively laid down in front of a charging animal with intent only to walk away. Other circumstances always intervened. And we have plenty of stories of people frozen in fear only to get dragged off. The two grizzly attacks from Glacier’s night of the grizzlies comes to mind. Hungry animals any size make calculations . You fight either way in that case bc the easier you are the quicker you die regardless. Thats my bollocks though. Do what you can to see your family again fck rhymes.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
It might be possible you’re both incorrect. It’s pretty dumb to imply they aren’t “scary”. But he also didn’t go about this “correctly” but he’s def more correct than this comment was. The idea is humans insert themselves in positions to be near great whites more than almost any other apex predators. Not only that but one could argue unlike bears, sharks don’t have the natural inclination to avoid humans, SPECIFICALLY. They will avoid situations that threaten them but there’s no evidence to suggest it’s bc a human is involved. Whereas apex predators like lions, gorillas, and certain bear have proven to understand the type of creature we are and v behave according to our perceived risk to their survivability. Of course great whites don’t hunt humans, but a bear is far more familiar with the concept of a human and their risk than a shark is. Bears will avoid humans at almost all costs. Excluding polar bears. Sharks are opportunistic. They avoid humans once they realize it’s not a cheap meal. But often mistake a human for a seal or some other easy meal. Once a great white decides you’re food, there’s nothing you can do. There’s no strategies. That’s just a comical false statement not even sure why that was said. You might have mean avoiding conflict. But on land, you can shoot a bear. You can make loud noises. You can spray a bear.
You can do none of these things to deter a shark once it decides to attack. There’s no strategy. None. The death & maim rate of someone attacked by a shark is much higher vs. bear attacks when excluding simple exploratory nibbles that remove a limb clean off. When you talk about dangerous animals, you’re talking about animals that can cause deadly harm with the habitual access to humans to do so . Simply bc you see a lot of great whites as many divers including myself have, doesn’t make them not scary. You’re just not interesting to them at the time. I get what ppl are trying to say by demonizing sharks, bc the overreaction can cause ppl to in turn hunt them but as far as if you see one in the wild, I pray no one listens to your dangerous anecdote. Much like a grizzly, croc, or big cat, avoid at ALL COSTS. All due respect, it’s very silly to suggest an animal that doesn’t actively hunt you isn’t scary if it’s very possible that same animal might confuse you for something it hunts. Bc at that point, your odds reduce to nil unless there’s some external force to save you. Sure oceanic white tips are scary bc they gravitate towards ship wrecks. And sure bull sharks are instinctively more aggressive. But as far as your survival rate from a full on attack, you can’t argue the great white would pose a smaller chance.
Regardless, I still don’t agree the great white is the scariest. Orcas certainly are scarier but it goes back to why I think your comment is incorrect jn the first place. Orcas do discriminate on the type of things they eat and statistically based on observed provable facts they confuse a human for a meal FAR less as well as hunt larger animals in packs. That type of hunting is much different than great whites. So the great whites propensity to confuse you for food is the kicker here. While I agree demonizing them as if they are man hunters is just egregiously and objectively wrong, it doesn’t change the fact that under specific circumstances, they are effective man killers. Maybe the most effective considering the arena, the advantages they possess, and our vulnerability.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Comparing this threat to potentially, god forbid, an outcome similar to that of Archduke FF is an egregious misunderstanding of history. You clearly are not knowledgeable on the tensions of south slavs, Yugoslav nationalism, and Austria-Hungary prewar.
You seem to think this, and every war just magically overnight morphs into multi theatre conflict: it did not & does not. It’s a cascading runaway reaction, WWI even more so.
For instance, the major powers that be at the time weren’t attacking each other. Germany was weary of Russian empire and a balance of power might be shifted: The Russian empire understood Austria’s motivation conveniently aligned in such a way that the Kaiserreich was guilty of some form of orchestration. Which we now know is true as they offered carte Blanche urging a quick strike.
Additionally, satellites nations like Britain did NOT just blindly dive in. They actually made overtures and attempts to mediate as this conflict was not a global one but one of internal dispute. And this is why you were so wrong about WW3 starting with Russia Ukraine, but pretended you weren’t and brushed it under the rug pushing your prediction out and out and out until eventually you get what you are looking for. What is the idealistic internal fight set to boil over making this like Archduke FF ? If this, god forbid, did occur it would be a US counter strike directly. The reason WW1 and 2, and any war happen is because they cascade from within. That’s all how you get multi theatre warfare. That’s how you get many combatants. Two superpowers attacking doesn’t necessarily start a world war it just starts an enormous one.
Another contrast can be found during WWII & it’s the complex history of Finland fighting both the Soviets and Reich. Or how Vichy France comes to exist and why those alliances were holdovers from the forgotten soft invasion of Germany by France in 1939. Or the imperial expansion exhibited by Japan first into Manchuria, then jehol, then Inner Mongolia and finally China. They even already entered Florence indochina an entire year ahead of Pearl Harbor. But had only done so after being firmly aligned by the Tripartite Pact.
So no Tim. A direct threat like this from one major combatant targeting another over a dispute of a luke warm ally is not the same as a Bosnian Serb assassinating the head of a state of a country who just violated the Berlin agreement annexing Bosnia and Herzegovina utterly destroying the already tenuous Balkan diplomacy and thus triggering complex allegiance negotiations
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Edit: to avoid non constructive commentary, a great way to enhance the payoff after finishing would be to include editorial remarks about the heated shack the initial officer could have passed by. Another major thing is the “lakefront” . Through editorial remarks you could position the set up to include talks and descriptions of the lakefront verbiage but the fact that it turns out to be a river is confusing . Maybe description of the river that might make it seem plausible it could be mistaken for a lake might help subconsciously guide the viewers eye. The chief link are the footsteps and the gate. The former conceivably was not set up to show the operation was SO remote that cop was seeing their footprints. Which is kinda proven real time . Bc if that were the case the officer would have followed that lead given how strange it is. Maybe giving some context in just how deserted it really is in hindsight which I suppose may not be true but again that points to why using this as the main lever to create a non linear story somewhat problematic. It’s not the Rosetta Stone so to speak this device needs to land. Same with the gate. There was nothing made of this gate really to make me remember it so upon its return the payoff isn’t there. All this to say, if you simply shifted the officers initial search before you went to a the couple in chronological order, meaning to after you described them as missing, does it devalue the footprint finding and subsequent calling off of the trail? IMO not at all, it might make more sense even. A way to do this as an example and why I even commented bc I do love non Traditional structure is hateful 8. Also not prototypical non linear but in reality it goes in order chapters 5,1,2,3,4,6. Specifically take the coffee pot poisoning. This works because much is made of how famous the coffee is and how much is made of the ONE coffee pot to remove doubt it could be a different pot. That way when we return to the film in a different POV, we don’t need to be told that the reason someone is violently ill is because the person who just was shown to poison this pot later in the film did so a while ago and is responsible for the sickness in the cabin. That’s how you create a payoff. Back to this story: Make this gate stand out if delay this. Describe things in the call mentioned in the setup.
11:33 n of 1, but unsolicited commentary from one writer to another incoming. I’ve noticed this on a few of these lately especially so I assume you have 1 or 2 ppl writing these. This is a very confusing quirk to this persons style whereby this almost non linear storytelling device is used. As someone who writes for money I can see how this would be really useful it’s almost as if though these are 10,000 words and when you condense it down to a more digestible video vehicle, you lose the strength of this. The pay off switching from the cop investigating in the snow downfall only to be cut short isn’t the payoff it should and makes it feel like unrelated events. Especially bc I bet many people are only listening. It’s almost too clever for its specific use case. Listeners realistically are tracking a story of connected dots but when you leap from one detailed account to another entirely unrelated one (at the time unrelated) you start to fatigue the attention. I am writing this paused at triangulation segment bc I found myself straining to try to keep the officer searching bit pinned in my brain. It was written so that in SUPPOSED to remember. Which I think is the difference in a more effective way to do it. This works in longer format or there are subtle links through the story OR most important to this shorter style, If you’re going to deploy this mechanic then include more effective transitions from the cop searching to the story or the couple . It makes the notion of a stark change in story less pronounced while also bridging the gap between the two. By the time you inevitably reveal this cop was searching for the bodies all along or was on the right path or something to that degree, you’ve already overloaded info bank on this story without subtle clue woven in to link them other than snow. So as mentioned, this payoff is already doomed before I’m even there. I’ll leave this comment here and eat crow if proven wrong after This cell tower triangulation but just something to consider that’s all . Fantastic work as always and great surprise upload!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Yeah I distill it down like this: for Volk to win, he has to do everything that walks directly into Islam’s strengths. While that’s not uncommon, why Islam is so dangerous is because he may not be the MOST well rounded fighter ever, his strengths are among the best we’ve seen . It’s just one of those stylistic nightmares . So long as islams chin holds up, volk will have to get inside so much that at some point statistically Islam will take him down: each trip to the ground zaps the necessary energy he needs to bounce in and out. Up until they go to floor the first time if he can even get up, volk is going to shine bright. His size ironically may help a bit with a smaller target to shoot on meaning Volk’s waist.
Any other fighter with even a slightly worse ability to wrestle, and Volk’s pocket fighting offsets the threat of a trip drag down. But like i said, ironically that’s where Islam is absolute world class. It’s fascinating Volk’s freakishly long arms. That’s going to immensely help him pick Islam apart. That’s where I see Volk’s window. If he’s patient, I don’t think he can out points him but he can hurt him enough pure boxing touching Islam on the way in that maybe just MAYBE he can stop the takedown. After a few failed shots over a couple rounds I see Islam getting desperate. That’s where volk catches him.
But I’m playing devils advocate. I don’t think volk can escape an Islam Thai clinch, eating a couple hammers from volk on the way, to a trip and then slow pass, GNP, then d’arce.
I wouldn’t call it an “easy” win but it’ll seem like that but this time the alternative reality for volk winnjng while unlikely, absolutely have a basis for reality that wouldn’t take a fluke like say GSP vs Serra
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I love Loma. But he’s truly just a bigger Rigo. And I love Rigo haha but their pro careers didn’t play out like their amateur careers. With Rigo, we have concrete evidence contracts and bout agreements refused to be signed. I chose to give Loma the benefit of the doubt on this too. But he lost the Lopez fight fair and square. No matter how you slice it . I get the other controversy. I had Haney just edging him but the other is a joke. But going up and losing can’t be your excuse. Rigo never used it and that’s Loma’s biggest win by far. And that jump was big for the Cuban who had a very defined comfort range in weight. It was a big jump for Loma. I get that too. But Loma opting to turn pro so late kinda washes out this who “championship belt record” talk to some degree. He was SEVERELY overqualified as an amateur. I expect him to beat Gary in his 3rd fight, yes 100%. Loma had a lot of ring time. He was an incredibly risky fight early bc he wasn’t truly “untested” the secret was out. And losing to an over the hill Loma isn’t quite as forgivable as it once was - nor is beating him. So the big names his career NEEDS obviously will avoid Loma. And the dangerous young guys Loma would get put over if he beat, he likely can’t. I hate what ppl have done to the word “duck”. It’s logical Loma avoid a fight with Shakur right now. Is that a duck? If you ask the kids these days, then yes . But I don’t think that’s fair to Loma - who surely got a lot of rejections while in his prime. He’s entitled to navigate his career at this point. He’s truly in the GGG predicament unfortunately. Loma is an incredible boxer. But to be in any ATG convo, I wish he got the job done with either Teo or Haney. It’s asking a lot but it’s what’s required to be put in that next tier. Failing to do that doesn’t mean he’s overrated, he’s rated as highly as we thought leaving such an extensive amateur career behind. But much like GGG his next fights have to be huge and he risks some stinkers to end his career if he’s not careful. His record does not reflect his greatness but it’s also not proof he’s an ATG. Say what you want about the Haney fight, but ask yourself: will Loma go down as Haney’s best win? If the answer is even possible to be a “no” then that speaks volumes given Rigo is Loma’s. Ppl tend to overcompensate defending Loma who is unfairly labeled “overrated” . That’s just silly, he just had a very odd timed career and tough to make big fights happen. And the bigger ones didn’t go his way. Again, all the hall marks of a rigondeaux who as much as it pains me, wasn’t able to have the career I wish he had but atleast he didn’t fall for the Cuban trap of pursuing Olympic cycle while having pro aspirations. That allowed him to get one major scalp in his prime upsetting Donaire is his absolute prime. I can’t even imagine how things may have been different for Loma if he went pro a bit sooner.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@vipe64 Jeff seems to recognize he’s not going to get anywhere with the junior officer so clamming is his best bet they have no evidence however there’s a catch:
heroin.
The guy who is usually the “prick” also likely clocked Jeff was soon to go through withdrawals. As a habitual user, although Jeff is seemingly innocent, he knows all too well when under duress of withdrawal he may say something he otherwise wouldn’t. The officers let him sweat it out for nearly 100 minutes applying the pressure back onto him. They both extend each other an olive brand. Jeff is willing to talk without recognizing his rights or signing to anything in exchange the “prick” detective recognizes this requires some nuance and takes over starting with a coke. While seemingly small, sugar and candy can indeed help dramatically stave off the onset of withdrawal. It’s not going to stop or weaken it, but by giving Jeff sugar and specifically (likely) things he genuinely likes, you’re triggering dopamine. it’s a thoughtful gesture for a guy like Jeff. The detective very much could give him water as is normal. He’s been told flat out he’s under arrest after all. People in his position are not normally afforded soda. This seems much less about quid pro quo and more the detective genuinely doesn’t want Jeff to Withdrawal. This is manifested in how Jeff ends a a frosty exchange with the detective being completely closed off only to add “thank you for the coke”. Proving he’s also aware they can wildly disagree about the current situation while still recognize the humanity and that he’s willing to work with Jeff meaning he’s not closed to the idea maybe they are missing something here.
Net, they keep asking questions bc while Jeff asked for his lawyer, I can only speculate he quickly realized it’s better to risk speaking to the more seasoned officer to avoid withdrawing which again I speculate why he was so adamant to have them say he’s actually under arrest as an addict while have a ticking clock counting down they are well in tune with until adverse symptoms set in.
Jeff doesn’t ACTUALLY a lawyer.. he just knows they don’t have his interest. But atleast the bald cop proved he was willing to spar which gives a guy like Jeff who has seen all sides of this multiple times an actual chance. And probably why he asked for the detective back in the room but wouldn’t sign anything. More evidence to this little dynamic playing out imo is Jeff replying no when this detective reads his rights to which the officer says “what” and Jeff remembers he’s not playing hardball anymore. Meaning the decision to “understand” was clearly he just didn’t want converse with the other detective as lead.
Cops technically can question you for a number of reasons even beyond asking for a rep. The can purposefully misconstrue sentances to follow up only for you to accidentally offer up proactive responses to which they are getting a foot in the door. You don’t want to end things with your foot in your mouth so you try to explain that last comment even if it wasn’t significant at all. A detective just has to get you talking again and in most cases that’s enough. If you want a lawyer, do exactly what Jeff did at the very start: that works. But again, heroin. Without the genuine fear of withdrawing in a holding cell, Jeff walks out with his possessions at first light .
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
8:30 I will never understand why ppl are so convinced Garcia isn’t anything other than a killer in the ring. It’s the same ppl that say “fight maths doesn’t work” yes haha it does just not when it’s inconvenient for you. Garcia dispatched Fonseca for very specific reasons that are relevant to his impending match with Tank who struggled to put away the Nicaraguan despite rehydrating to a massive frame.
You have the advent of social media that gives stars always on media chances. Imagine sticking a microphone in front of a baby faced Tyson around the time of Tillman, Douglas, Spinks, Tubbs, Bruno, etc. even Mike I’m sure would agree that’s a terrible idea. We form these ideas from our perception of who they are but discount we never had that with many previous stars. Floyd revolutionized that with the all access type show making those must see TV. And no shock we have formed our own conclusions based on what he shows us. We never got that with former giants unless it was media friendly Ali who serves as another example but in an era where self preservation was almost a sin and boxers fought monthly. Even modern superstars like Canelo were limited as he’s progressing amazingly with his English but still there’s a limitation there. Example being the most heated line for his GGG fight being “luck is for the mediocre my friend” or vs Plant needing a slipped punch and a two piece combo to do the marketing.
He’s a taller, quicker left hook leading counter puncher vs a smaller, lunging Davis. If you need examples of the countless times proving the statistics favor Garcia unequivocally, then you’re also the type to say boxers shouldn’t be selective as they rise with who they right. Never mind Cus, rest his soul, was more diligent navigating carefully any young champions career than we’ve seen in history that of a young Tyson.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1