My mom narrowly survived 9/11. Several of her friends and coworkers were tragically killed. I don’t normally share this level of detail on Twitter, but given what’s I’m seeing, I feel compelled to share her story (with her permission). My mom, a Jewish immigrant from the Soviet Union who came to New York in 1976, came to this country to escape persecution and for a better life. As it turns out, Socialists and Communists hate Jews. Shocker. My mom started working at the World Trade Center as a Mainframe Programmer at Morgan Stanley in 1987 (Morgan Stanley Dean Witter on 9/11). My mom was working on the 67th floor of the 2nd Building during the 1993 WTC bombing. Thankfully, she survived, though it left a lasting mark on her. My mom was working on the 56th floor of the 2nd Building during 9/11. They had just moved her team to that floor a few weeks prior. She had finished a meeting and was working when she looked out the 56th floor window and saw that the 1st Building had been hit. She thought it was an electrical explosion or something since they were always doing some work in the buildings. She saw paper and debris flying everywhere, and thick smoke pouring out. No one really knew what was going on, but remembering the 1993 bombing, her gut instinct was to get out of there. My mom grabbed her small pouch that had some spare cash in it, grabbed a few of her coworkers, and they started going down the building. When they had reached the 22nd floor, the 2nd plane hit the 2nd Building. She knew she was on the 22nd floor because of a massive column in the center of the building, and they felt the whole building shake. Her and the people with her began sprinting down the stairs to get out. My mom didn’t know what was going on, but seeing the smoke and knowing that it was toxic to breathe in, wanted to get as far away as possible. She just started walking, trying to get to Queens. She made her way through Chinatown, and out of a gut instinct, went into a store and bought a disposable camera with the emergency money in her pouch. She took many photos of the buildings, and was able to get them developed. I don’t know think any documentaries have ever gotten ahold of them, but I’ll share a few here. My mom kept walking. Walking to Queens. By the time she had made it to the 59th St Bridge, someone she was passing by told her that The Twin Towers had collapsed. “What do you mean? I was just at work a second ago — that doesn’t make any sense.” My mom was ironically, in 2006, one of many laid off as Morgan Stanley offshored many of their programming jobs to India. My mom, every year on 9/11, remembers. Every year on 9/11, my dad would tell me: “wish your mother a Happy 2nd Birthday”. As a kid, I never really understood, but my dad would say, “it’s a day to celebrate that she survived, to be here with us.” My mom survived. Not one, but two terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center. I am forever blessed and count myself as one truly lucky New Yorker. Many were not. Everyone knows someone. 9/11, for New York City, was a New Founding. A transformative moment. This tragedy, and our subsequent grit and tenacity, is woven into the DNA of every real New Yorker. For someone running for MAYOR of New York City to have such little understanding of this core truth, to go as far as to try to leverage it in a POLITICAL COUNTER-MESSAGE OF SHAMING AND RALLYING, is to admit that they are fundamentally disconnected from the reality of what it means to be a New Yorker and thus, be Mayor of New York City. If you’re a New Yorker, you know this to be true. You know we cannot have Mamdani in office. If we want our city to continue to survive and thrive, we simply cannot.

I loved the show, one of the best! youtube.com/watch?v=d0kuOzKs…

I write as a current professor of international law & retired US Army judge advocate with experience advising commanders in combat. 1) It doesn't matter that @gbsumudflotilla is (now, was) on the High Seas & not in @Israel's 12 mile territorial sea. Vessels are subject to capture outside neutral waters if they are breaching or attempting to breach a blockade. Source: San Remo Manual (SRM) ¶ 146 (pic 1, yellow highlight). 2) Maritime security measures conducted during peacetime are beyond the scope of SRM since the manual addresses international law applicable to armed conflicts at sea. So, it doesn't matter how long @Israel has enforced a naval blockade. The current armed conflict was initiated by #Hamas on October 7, 2023 - and rules reflected in the San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea have applied since then. Additionally, @CIJ_ICJ does not have unilateral authority to establish int'l law - whether through advisory opinions or otherwise. Therefore it doesn't matter what ICJ "found illegal" in advisory opinions. 3) There is no provision in SRM requiring a blockade to be a "short term measure." By definition, blockades can be enforced for the duration of the armed conflict - no matter how long the armed conflict may last. Source: SRM ¶¶ 93-94 (pic 2). 4) In any event, SRM rules DO NOT "explicitly state that humanitarian supplies may not be blockaded." There are rules addressing that conduct, but these rules are subject to other conditions & restrictions. As such, there is no outright ban on blockading "humanitarian supplies." Source: SRM ¶¶ 102-04 (pic 3). 5) It doesn't matter what the "UN Commission of Inquiry has already determined." Like ICJ advisory opinions, no UN CoI has unilateral authority to establish int'l law. Substantive merits of this report are beyond the scope of this post, but for a brief discussion see @Aizenberg55's observations here (x.com/Aizenberg55/status/196…) & here (x.com/Aizenberg55/status/196…). The claim that the "blockade is plainly a part of the machinery of such genocide" is just as anecdotal & authoritative as the UN CoI report Craig Murray cites here for support. For reasons 1 to 5 nothing in Craig Murray's post constitutes a legitimate articulation or analysis of int'l law. Then, as one might imagine, the remaining "so what" points unravel from there. 6) Attack on a vessel attempting to breach a naval blockade is just an attack on that vessel - not "on the flag state of the vessel attacked." 7) Detaining a vessel & its crew for breaching or attempting to breach a blockade is not an act "of illegal possession of vessels or abduction of crew on the High Seas." For neutral vessels breaching or attempting to breach a blockade, capturing the vessel is exercised by taking such vessel as prize for adjudication. Source: SRM ¶ 146 (back to pic 1, blue highlight). 8) So Metropolitan Police and DPP have NO obligation to, well...do anything at all. Here's the thing. Given the extensive #legaldisinformation presented in Craig Murray's post, it's troubling how much it's circulated on @X even now < 24 hours since publication. My guess is that reflects 3 related factors: 1) his seemingly impressive claim of personal authority at the outset; 2) most ppl who don't specialize in int'l law don't know any better even when they read complete rubbish such as Craig Murray's analysis; and 3) part of the reason many ppl don't know any better is they want to be duped because they want to find some seemingly legit excuse to hate 🇮🇱 ( Zionists as proxy for 🇮🇱 Jews as proxy for Zionists). But these rampant misrepresentations of int'l law serve only 2 purposes: 1) support strategic objectives of terrorists like Hamas; 2) encourage hate & violence directed against Jews. Enough. Don't be fooled by "experts" like Craig Murray who don't actually know what they're talking about when it comes to int'l law. I hope you find this helpful, and thank you for your attention to this matter.

Few people realize Hannah Einbinder attended public school in Beverly Hills—alongside the largest community of Persian Jewish refugees in America. Nearly 40% of Hannah’s classmates were either Persian Jewish refugees or the children of refugees who fled the Islamic Regime. Unlike Hannah, who grew up in the nepo baby bubble of her mother’s SNL career, her Persian classmates didn’t come from privilege. Their parents, like mine, lost everything — homes, businesses, careers, even family members — all for the chance to live free as Jews. These families had to rebuild their lives from nothing after fleeing religious persecution in Iran. But instead of recognizing the lived experience of the refugee kids she grew up with — kids who welcomed her into their homes, shared birthdays, sat beside her in English class and laughed at her jokes at the lunch table — Hannah erased their history from the narrative altogether. And that is what makes Hannah Einbinder such a performative fraud. To posture at the Emmys as a self-proclaimed “savior of the oppressed,” while dismissing the trauma and oppression experienced by her Persian Jewish friends — this isn’t ignorance. It’s opportunism from a morally bankrupt sellout desperate for accolades. Because the truth is this: without Israel, most Jewish refugees, like my family, have nowhere to go. This was true in 1948, it was true when my parents fled Iran, and it remains true today. For Persian Jews, Israel is not an abstract idea — it’s the insurance policy of our continued survival. My parents settled in America, yes. But it took years for most of my family to obtain a visa and find their way here. In fact, the vast majority of Jewish refugees fleeing Iran had nowhere to go but Israel — the same Jewish state Hannah wants to sever from Judaism itself. And if America had closed its doors, as it did during the Holocaust? If Israel had not existed? Over 100,000 Persian Jews would still be trapped in Iran — prisoners of the Islamic Regime — with no rights, no future, and none of the freedoms Hannah so easily takes for granted. Hannah knows this truth. When she condemned Israel at the Emmys, she wasn’t just another misguided celebrity with a platform. She was someone who grew up in a community full of marginalized Persian Jewish refugees and chose to render them invisible. Someone who knew—firsthand—that the exile and displacement of Jewish people didn’t end with the Holocaust, yet still pushed the lie that Israel’s existence and Jewish survival are mutually exclusive. And with that, Hannah Einbinder revealed herself as just another Hack: erasing Jewish suffering, spitting on it, cashing it in, and selling her betrayal as activism.

I see the FBI has taken to writing fan-fiction. Young gay men talk to one another like this? Half of it is in cop speak: "interrogated" "squad car" "retrieve it" "swept that spot" And why does he address multiple loose ends in a convo with his significant other unprompted after expressing that he didn't want him involved? You're not good at this.

Charlie Kirk shooting suspect Tyler Robinson's texts with roommate, from charging document

New Tyler Robinson posts leaked to me tell a very different story than you've heard before: kenklippenstein.com/p/exclus…

Navi Pillay's UN inquiry on Israel just released a report accusing Israel of “genocide.” We asked legal expert Salo Aizenberg to take a look. Turns out the report is a complete travesty. See his devastating rebuttal here: 🧵 unwatch.org/un-watch-rebutta… @Aizenberg55

Russians were asked to name the top 10 most extraordinary people of all time, anywhere. They chose... Stalin, Putin, and Lenin. levada.ru/2025/06/17/samye-v…

I have made a substantial number of investments where I have earned a many-fold multiple of capital — on more than a handful of occasions, 50, 100 or even 1,500 times multiple of invested capital. I have found these opportunities because of a willingness to consider the improbable as possible. The fact that it is uncommon to do so increases the rewards for those who do. In my experience, the vast majority of people look at the world from the perspective of what is most probable, and assume that events will unfold in that manner. I always consider the possibility and the probability that the improbable occurs. I do this to avoid risk and to find opportunities. On avoiding risk, I don’t take small chances that could have catastrophic outcomes. This perspective also makes me open to non-mainstream, non-consensus views on world events. On @X, I have periodically raised the possibility of an improbable explanation for a specific event or situation. When I have done so, people assume that I have lost it, or they call me a conspiracy theorist or worse. I remind you that many quickly dismissed and scorned conspiracy theories have turned out to be true. Often times, calls that someone is a conspiracy theorist are simply attempts to discredit or cancel someone who is getting uncomfortably close to the truth. I have an open mind to unexpected and improbable outcomes, both good and bad. That’s made me a better investor and given me greater insight into the world. My willingness to consider the improbable increases, the greater the reward that comes from the low probability outcome being true. The rewards could be financial. They could make one healthier or they could explain some previous unexplained event, among other benefits. Further investigation into the improbable is warranted, in my view, if the rewards are high enough. I encourage you to consider and analyze the improbable. This used to be called having an open mind, until that became uncommon.

like everyone else, I've had a hard time trying to understand the Trump=Zelensky blowup - a task made more difficult for me because I have experience in mineral projects and know that the so-called Ukrainian "rare earth" projects are worthless and that the prospect of US recovering its expenditures from Ukrainian mineral projects is negligible. So what really is going on? My guess: Trump's idea was that, if Ukraine became an overt economic colony of USA, it would be functionally equivalent to joining NATO without the finger-in-eye symbolism of Ukraine actually joining NATO. The status of a formal US economic colony would be a poison pill to further Russia conflict. Trump was not prepared to provide FORMAL security guarantees along with the deal, because much, if not most, of his base was vehemently opposed to further and deeper military involvement in a forever war against a nuclear power on its doorstep. Trump figured that the economic colony deal would provide informal security guarantees that would accomplish what Ukraine wanted, but without antagonizing his voters. On his side, Zelensky obviously wanted the equivalent of NATO Article 5 written in stone, but that wasn't something that Trump was prepared to deliver. Trump's seemingly goofy "rare earth" deal was a subterfuge way of delivering what Zelensky wanted, but without riling the US voters. In the end, Zelensky sounded like an aggrieved party in a divorce hearing, trying to re-litigate the infidelity of his spouse while the judge was ruling on child custody. As Farid Zakaria observed, what Zelensky should have done was to invent a new Ukranian civil honor and use the occasion to bestow this new and grandiose honor on Trump as a honorary knight commander of Ukraine airborne cavalry or something like that. Personally, I think that it's just as well that the deal blew up. US is strongly resistant to Chinese economic colonization of Panama and complains about Chinese economic presence in Canada, Mexico and elsewhere. So it's hard to see that Russia would view increased US economic colonization of Ukraine as a solution to the issues as opposed to a complication. But who knows? There remains much mystery.

Here is a recap of the Ukraine situation, for those choosing to reject propaganda and continue seeking truth: December 1994, Ukraine agrees to give up its nuclear arsenal in return for security guarantees from the US, UK, France, China and Russia. February 2014, Russia invades and subsequently annexes Crimea, President Obama does next to nothing. War through weakness. July 2019, Trump admin withholds $250 million in military aid to Ukraine to apply pressure to investigate alleged corruption by Hunter and Joe Biden. February 2022, Russia invades a weakened Ukraine, world expects Zelenskyy to flee and Kyiv to fall within days. Ukrainians fight bravely for 3 years, inflict hundreds of thousands of casualties on Russian army, weaken Putin politically. U.S. has sent ~$70 billion in outdated military equipment to Ukraine since start of war, providing opportunity for U.S. military to modernize its weaponry. We’ve sent an additional $30 billion in budget support, $75 billion in ancillary appropriations related to war. ~50,000 Ukrainians have died defending their homeland, protecting U.S. and Western interests in the process. Meanwhile, the U.S. President and V.P. are calling democratically-elected Zelenskyy a dictator and berating him in Oval Office in pursuit of a financial payoff. The U.S. should be thanking Ukrainians, who have fought for our common interests with only modest financial support from a country with a ~$30 trillion GDP. America can and will reclaim its backbone again soon, with better policy and messaging from common sense moderates. Slava Ukraina.

The scenes from Gaza are terrifying. I’ve never seen anything like this. Thousands of men consumed by hate trying to get to three innocent girls. x.com/khaybarjew/status/1881…

Today I learned men hate nose rings on women even more vocally than they hate tattoos

Can I just kidnap two random kids on the streets of NYC and expect the government to release 40 serial killers per kid, or is this something we only expect the Jews to do?

Here is the link to the full @HJS_Org report on Hamas’ fatalities statistics from Gaza: henryjacksonsociety.org/publ… We have very deliberately tried to omit value judgment and opinions from the report and give benefit of the doubt as much as possible. It’s still damning: there’s just too much wrong. Too many errors, too many impossibilities, too many signs of obvious data manipulation. We wrote this not to give a definitive figure. We wrote it to give people the means to rebut the false narrative wherever possible. We have relied solely on Hamas’ own figures to damn them. Our primary source, overwhelmingly, was Hamas themselves. Let me break it down chapter by chapter. 1/9