Alex Oldham retweeted
Thats literally just like little kids after along day of doing bs my goodness we dont deserve dogs
Alex Oldham retweeted
I saw this last night. I only saw the trailer. I’m so glad I went in not knowing much. It’s AWESOME. I understand why this film is so divisive. The film is calling out BOTH SIDES. Either side can’t take the criticism, emotions take over, thus bad reviews. For an independent like myself, it’s beyond refreshing to see a movie literally praise each side and relay the sentiment of “the show must go on”. The core message of this incredible film can’t be received by its intended audience because they’re too busy drinking the KoolAid from their respective MSM outlets. For the rest of us, not emotionally driven by a worldview dictated to us, this film is for us. I loved every second of it. Highly recommend it. And see it in IMAX.
Alex Oldham retweeted
About that “Soviet tank strength”
Goebbels says the same in his diaries. The Third Reich leadership were completely blown away (understatement!) by the Soviet Union’s industrial capacity (which had been moved into the country’s interior).
We aren’t really allowed to acknowledge that in West, not least because it showed extraordinary success of state-led coordination (in some contexts anyway!)
Alex Oldham retweeted
This dude adopted a rescue hyena and named his Eddie. He videos jokes and Eddie howls with laughter.
Alex Oldham retweeted
I like how we found the one genuine Mercantilist still alive and decided to make him president. This is not a view I thought would have existed in 2026.
Alex Oldham retweeted
He was a mensch for this. He did a lot of stupid, evil things as president. But when he had the chance to leverage public opinion against a vulnerable minority, for personal gain, he said "no". Imagine the current crop of criminals showing even this baseline level of integrity.
Alex Oldham retweeted
This pitch was ~50mph, middle middle. Wearing kevlar. Eyes of the world on him. From the rubber (60’6”away).
Go outside today and try to throw a fastball for a strike from even 46’ away, wearing your most comfortable tee. Let me know how it goes.
I find these World Trade Center simulations by Kostack Studio fascinating because they remove the smoke and let you see the collapse much more clearly.
In the real footage, so much is hidden by fire, dust, debris, distance, and chaos that many people come away with the impression that the towers simply dropped straight down into their own footprints.
But that is not really what happened.
These simulations make it much easier to see that the collapse begins in the heavily damaged and fire-weakened region, the upper section starts moving and tilting, and the destruction then propagates downward through the structure.
The towers do not simply disappear vertically into their own footprints. Large portions of the upper structure and exterior are moving outward and to the side as the collapse develops. Much of that motion is simply obscured in the real videos once the enormous debris cloud forms.
And this is also why I find these simulations useful when people describe the collapses as looking like “controlled demolition.”
Strip away the smoke and dust and the resemblance becomes much less convincing.
What you see is a highly asymmetric structural failure beginning around the aircraft-damaged and fire-affected floors, followed by an enormous moving mass progressively overwhelming the structure beneath it. There is tilting, rotation, exterior columns peeling away, debris being thrown far outside the building footprint, and structural failure occurring chaotically as the collapse moves downward.
That is very different from the neat mental image usually implied by “controlled demolition,” where structural supports are deliberately severed in a carefully timed sequence to produce a predetermined collapse.
And importantly, we already know what preceded these collapses.
Both towers suffered massive aircraft-impact damage. Fireproofing was stripped from portions of the structure. Large, uncontrolled fires then burned across multiple floors - for about 56 minutes in the South Tower and about 102 minutes in the North Tower - heating and weakening structural components until collapse initiated.
Once that upper mass began moving, the loads imposed on the floors and structure beneath became vastly greater than anything they had been designed to carry.
The result was progressive collapse.
No, an animation is not proof simply because it looks convincing, and these are not official NIST simulations. They are visualizations built under particular assumptions.
But as visualizations, I think they are extremely useful.
They let you see something the original footage often cannot show clearly: beneath that enormous cloud of smoke and debris was a complicated, violent, asymmetric structural failure - not two buildings neatly dropping straight down into their own footprints.
A note on the simulation: this is not intended to reproduce the collapse down to the exact motion of every beam, floor panel, and fragment of debris. No practical simulation could do that. Its value is in modeling the large-scale structural behavior - how the major sections deform, move, tilt, separate, and progressively fail. Think of it as a visualization of the mechanics and overall collapse behavior, not a frame-by-frame reconstruction of where every piece of steel ultimately landed.
Alex Oldham retweeted
The 2002 NYT story collecting everything we know about what happened in the towers after the planes hit is grim, but then you get the occasional absolutely bonkers survival story. nytimes.com/2002/05/26/nyreg…
Alex Oldham retweeted
Germany killed roughly 350,000 to 400,000 French citizens and residents during World War II. Of course, North American Nazis don't know any of that because they get their history from Instagram Reels and Twitter instead of books.
Alex Oldham retweeted
JFK on the Cuban Missile Crisis: You know that old story about Abe Lincoln in the Cabinet, he said, "All in favor say, 'Aye,' and the whole cabinet voted 'Aye,' and Lincoln voted 'No' and he said the vote is No." The constitution places the responsibility on the president.
Alex Oldham retweeted
Guess who said this:
"Anyone in my position not taking the Fifth Amendment would be a fool, an absolute fool. One statement or answer that is ever so slightly off, just ever so slightly by accident, by mistake, such as it was a sunny beautiful day, when actually it was slightly overcast, would be met by law enforcement at a level seldom seen in this country, because I've experienced it."
Alex Oldham retweeted
The chilling psychological effects of combat, told through a Vietnam veteran's first hand experience.
Alex Oldham retweeted
George H.W. Bush kept his assets in a blind trust, as did Bill Clinton. Neither Obama nor Biden traded stocks or bonds while in office. 3,700 trades is probably more than all the trades of all the presidents until now. And he is trading stocks that are affected by his decisions. A walking conflict of interest, at the least, and perhaps insider trading. Just as members of Congress should not be able to trade stocks, so too the president. bloomberg.com/news/articles/…


































