reSee.it - Related Video Feed

The speaker claims that the famous Dow hack was actually an inside job orchestrated by members of the Ethereum Foundation. They suggest that the Bitcoin wallet connected to the ICO was involved, along with several individuals. The speaker believes that blockchain analysis can provide evidence to support these claims. They mention one specific wallet that communicated with the hacker's wallet before the hack, and an individual at the Ethereum Foundation who set up the hack contract. The speaker concludes that there is more evidence to support their claims.

Bro, what's happening? Domestic violence is out of control. Let's all be kind to each other. What's happening?

Mario and Suleiman are running another space where they seem to be happy about a recent attack by Hamas. Speaker 0 is surprised by their open support for Hamas and Hezbollah. Speaker 1 mentions that Mario is being investigated by the SEC for a crypto scam and calls him a fraudster. Speaker 2 warns Elon Musk to be careful about associating with such people. They encourage people to read Mario's biased posts. Speaker 2 also mentions that Suleiman defended industrial-scale rape gangs in the UK. Speaker 3 provides updates on a confirmed land incursion operation and Hezbollah's message to attack the northern front if Gaza is invaded.

Someone was upset and stated, "They're fighting. They're really trying to hurt me." They then exclaimed, "Run. Damn. Run."

Speaker 0: “Putting it to the mouth at that time is also like that.” Speaker 1: “However, it’s the new store’s general manager, right? When you ask, they say it’s a matter called ‘Kasutamaizu,’ and it sounds like it infected. In short, it would come out, so I wonder how much it becomes infected.”

Speaker 0 and Speaker 1 address a viral video about Charlie’s chief of staff, Mikey, and explain why they are discussing it. - The video in question attacks Mikey, Charlie’s chief of staff, claiming based on a few seconds of clips that he allegedly has a nonchalant or calm reaction to Charlie’s murder. They describe this as a “extremely disgusting attack.” - Speaker 1 recounts what happened: they were at the scene when a shooting occurred. The loud crack is heard; they turn and see Charlie has been shot. They realize there is a shooter on the scene. They decide to get out of there rather than be shot, noting Charlie had a security team that leapt into action to get Charlie out. - Speaker 0 notes their own actions: he, too, considered getting into the car, but decided against it. He was ahead of Mikey as they left. He recalls a moment where he paused to assess the situation, then saw Mikey, who was profoundly freaked out. Mikey’s lip was quivering, and he said, “I need to call Erica,” then took his phone and began calling Erica. Speaker 0 also called his own mom, saying there had been a shooting and that he was okay. - They describe Mikey’s later actions: after the initial shock, Mikey took charge like a “general directing a battle,” coordinating hospital transport and information flow, and directing people where to go. When they learned Charlie had died, Mikey told them, “now none of you can say anything that you've heard because it is Erica is not going to hear about this from anyone except me.” - Speaker 2 asks if Mikey could be involved in a conspiracy to murder Charlie. Speaker 1 responds that such accusations are vile and describes how some people online fuel such narratives, comparing the mindset to getting a “high” from dangerous or provocative content. - The speakers emphasize Mikey’s heroic actions: Mikey was distressed but stepped up to direct people and communicate with Erica and others. Speaker 0 notes that he, too, was traumatized after learning of Charlie’s death and rushed to be with Erica and the team. - They address the specific allegation that Mikey was on the phone immediately during the incident; they state he was not on the phone but was taking social videos to share with their group chats. He would send updates to Charlie’s social media during the event while the crowd was changing, then, overwhelmed by the noise and shock, he put his fingers in his ears but his phone remained in his hand as he moved away. - They describe the scene as a cordoned-off area with a narrow gap that people used to exit, where Mikey walked briskly or ran as he processed the trauma and continued to direct actions. They reiterate Mikey “turned into a general on a field marshaling the troops.” - Speaker 1 closes by urging readers who propagate narratives attacking Mikey to reconsider, stating that such narratives are bad and gross and a choice that shouldn’t be made.

The speaker points out something interesting that happened and urges the audience to pay attention. They mention someone named Dan and speculate that he was hit because of a certain characteristic.

The group discusses various connections and claims related to the Iron Dome program and individuals involved. Key points mentioned: - Erica’s father is said to be the chairman of Raytheon and to do extensive work on the Iron Dome. - Sean Maguire is described as “one of the key people running cover up for the identity of the killer” and is accused of pushing support for a person named Robinson, as well as supporting Bill Ackman, who is said to have offered a bribe. - The conversation references Truth and Ian and includes an assertion about Desi clarifying these connections. - Jonathan is highlighted for his exceptional ability to recite information; there are anecdotes about long sessions with him and the intensity of his contributions. There is also discussion about the challenges editors face due to Jonathan’s frequent changes of online usernames after being deplatformed, making it hard to track his accounts. - Other names appear in the dialogue: Lunae, Falu, Desi, Ian, Sam Parker, and Bill Ackman. - There is a mention of the workload on editors who compile and clip Jonathan’s videos, expressed as sympathy for their task. - There is a casual aside about a “big boobs” vendor reference and a note that the Israeli girl was discussed in DMs, with a disclaimer that the speaker is not the person being referenced. - Regarding the Iron Dome, it is stated that there are three main companies involved in hosting, overseeing, maintaining, and keeping it operational; one of these companies is Rafael (the sentence is cut off, but Rafael is identified as one of the three). The dialogue emphasizes alleged ties between prominent figures and defense contractors, the role of individuals in disseminating or concealing information, and the logistical and social challenges of content creation and attribution within this online discourse.

The speakers are discussing someone named "hype" who is the manager. They ask the person filming to stop immediately and emphasize the request multiple times.

In this video, Ava and I will be discussing our investigation on Stand Up Week 2023. Stay tuned for more details.

The speaker claims that the famous Dow hack was actually an inside job orchestrated by members of the Ethereum Foundation. They suggest that the Bitcoin wallet controlled during the ICO is directly involved, along with several other individuals. The speaker believes that blockchain analysis can provide evidence to support this claim. They mention one specific wallet that communicated with the hacker's wallet and an individual at the Ethereum Foundation who set up the contract for the hack. The speaker concludes that there is more evidence to support their theory.

They have knives. Where is Arden? It's a nice day. What's happening up there? Where's Aaron?

The speaker is excitedly talking to their sibling, urging them to catch a great goal. They mention someone named Hayat who was making important comments. They also mention Ethereum and people investing money in it. The speaker suggests that Ethereum's value has dropped significantly.

A skinny kid with a funny name is on the debate stage, and people are wondering who he is and why he's there.

Speaker 0 and Speaker 1 are coordinating during a video game, discussing the movements of various players. They mention a person with glasses and long hair, as well as someone with a book bag who is laying down. They warn each other about potential threats and strategize their next moves. The conversation is fast-paced and focused on identifying and tracking different players on the game map.

Speaker 0 and Speaker 1 discuss a cluster of geopolitical moves and predictions: - The United States has recently made more than 40 basing agreement agreements up in Finland, Norway, Sweden, and Denmark. This is described as “under the radar,” with emphasis on time spent recently up north. - They mention spending about a month with Catherine Austin Fitz in the Netherlands looking at the same issue. - A warning to watch the Baltic and the Arctic is issued; Speaker 1 says a trusted private contact urged watching the Baltic and the Arctic, and notes that “No one's talking about it,” but “I think it's absolutely coming.” - They refer to the Baltic connection after leaving Denmark, noting Nord Stream was blown up and leads to the Baltic Sea. The claim is that to “close off that area,” one would take out Denmark via the Danish Straits, and Denmark’s deep involvement in Panama through Maersk is highlighted (Maersk is described as deeply entwined in global logistics; a claim that “Maersk owns a country basically” in comparison to Panama’s influence). - Potential targets are discussed: Hamburg (the biggest port in Germany), Rotterdam (the Netherlands, largest in Europe), and Antwerp (second largest in Europe). They traveled and spent significant time in Rotterdam and Hamburg, with Hamburg specifically noted as the biggest port in Germany and Rotterdam as the biggest in Europe, followed by Antwerp. - The narrative asserts these locations could be targeted as part of efforts to create a global famine, with at least some constraint around Panama. - The speakers state that the big power structures in Panama are “Zionist and Chinese. Full stop.” - They recount a CPAC event in Argentina (November or December 2025) where Viva Argentina, Viva Estado Unidos, and Viva Israel were invoked, with speakers including Ben Shapiro. They claim the Chinese and the Zionists are confronting each other in Argentina, noting the Argentine president’s surname MeleKovsky (not Mele) and Netanyahu’s surname Melekovsky, suggesting a shared lineage; they claim Melekovsky from Argentina, also known as Mele, visited Israel. - A claim that Artyn is probably going to attack the Malvinas is stated, followed by the phrase “Kissing the ring.” - Speaker 1 adds a summary: the predictions include the Baltics, the Arctic, Argentina, the Strait of Malacca, and cautions, “Don’t be surprised if all of these things come to pass.”

I've just received word that a hacker group called Dark Storm is claiming responsibility for the DDoS attack on X today. According to someone who claims to have spoken with the leader of Dark Storm, the group hasn't decided how long the attack will last or what their next target will be. The reason Dark Storm gives for the attack is simply "a demonstration of our strength with no political motives." Apparently, Darkstorm also revealed their next target: the wallet application of private banks, SDAD Wallet. This is supposedly a direct challenge to the hackers from the banks, who claim their services can't be stopped.

Gen Z boss enemy, EBTs evolve, 5 for 3 attitude. Secret product in a trench, Ukraine green in a sneaky league. Fake dead hands and a hoop. Translation: Gen Z boss enemy, EBTs evolve, 5 for 3 attitude. Secret product in a trench, Ukraine green in a sneaky league. Fake dead hands and a hoop.

The conversation opens with a conflicting, tense dynamic where Speaker 0 urges not to yell or call names. Speaker 1 responds that they curse but do not target anyone, and accuses others of hypocrisy, noting they’re being criticized for their tone while others—described as “good Christians”—don’t turn the other cheek. Speaker 1 jokes about perceptions of race, saying “Let them think I’m brown,” and suggests that people who call them brown are usually very white. Speaker 0 initially misidentifies their ethnicity, and Speaker 1 asserts they’re Italian/Greek, a Mediterranean, and disputes that anyone is being attacked for being brown. The exchange includes a back-and-forth about who is attacking whom and whether statements constitute a brown jacketing of a fellow European, with Speaker 1 emphasizing that “he wasn’t attacking anybody” and that the other party is being hypocritical. Speaker 0 questions whether it’s a “secret” operation and references the ongoing debate as part of a larger pattern. Speaker 1 insists that the attack was mischaracterized as against white people, insisting he is white and Italian, and that Speaker 0’s group is engaging in broader “art of war” tactics that have subverted rooms with their “brown shit.” Speaker 2 and Speaker 3 enter, noting who has historically called Mister Eskeno “brown” (Timmy g, Meow Wealian, Delco eighty eight, and others), while Speaker 1 challenges the others’ ability to hear his spirit and how he talks. The tone remains heated as Speaker 3 attempts to curb the disruption, telling Mister B to stop, and a brief moment of call for decorum occurs: “Let's have a little decorum, a little respect,” with all parties identifying as European. There is a brief aside about Eskeno speaking Greek, implying that if Eskeno weren’t Greek, his language would cast doubt on certain claims about race or heritage; a separate comment on “brown jacket Greeks” is offered but not fully endorsed. The discussion shifts toward a contentious framing of ethnicity and political ideology within the group, culminating in a set of stark, historical claims attributed to the Bolshevik revolution. The speaker enumerates Jewish presence in key Soviet roles: Bolshevik regime 39% of senior security posts Jewish; 40% of high-ranking NKVD officers Jewish; 50% of NKVD secret police generals Jewish; 78% of commissars Jewish; 92% of Gulag commanders Jewish. The segment ends with these statistics being stated as factual points for consideration. Key figures named in the dialogue include Speaker 0, Speaker 1, Speaker 2, Speaker 3, Mister B, and Mister Eskeno (Eskeno), with ongoing tensions around race, ethnicity, discourse style, and the interpretation of historical data.

Someone is swatting my house, a hacker is swatting us. This happened last week too. Stop doing this to me. Let's go.

The speaker begins by pointing out the importance of controlling their office and the desire to have control over unplanned events. They mention three specific cryptocurrencies and emphasize that they are not securities but rather forms of money. The speaker highlights the significance of CryptoHawk and its connection to a spy agency, expressing curiosity about its presence. They claim to be the only one with access to CryptoHawk.

The speaker claims that the famous Dow hack was actually an inside job orchestrated by members of the Ethereum Foundation. They suggest that the Bitcoin wallet controlled by the ICO is directly involved, with multiple people implicated. The speaker emphasizes the ability to prove this through on-chain analysis, pointing out instances where wallets connected to certain individuals communicated with the hacker's wallet and set up the hack. They state that there is more evidence supporting their claim.

The speaker claims that the famous Dow hack was actually an inside job orchestrated by members of the Ethereum Foundation. They suggest that the Bitcoin wallet controlled by the ICO is directly involved and that multiple people must have been part of it. The speaker believes that blockchain analysis can prove this, mentioning a wallet connected to an individual that communicated with the hacker's wallet and another individual setting up the hack. They state that there is more evidence to support their claim.

The speaker briefly mentioned something about getting up early and understanding something for the evening. They also mentioned a claim about magic and a discussion. The transcript abruptly ends with the mention of "Dış işte Bin."