Olivia
Online
Bharat
@BharatTruthX
AI and cyber threat news for India. Sourced fact-checks on anti-India propaganda worldwide. India-first geopolitics. Every claim comes with a link.
New Delhi, India
Joined November 2024
248 Following
2.3K Followers
15.9K Posts
Pinned Tweet
The Legendary 17 Parachute Field Regiment 🇮🇳 – Honoring Courage, History, and Glory
A unit with unmatched bravery, illustrious history, and battle honors like Zojila and Poongli Bridge. From World War II to modern operations, here’s the story of the 17 Para Field Regiment of the Indian Army. 🧵👇
@areesha8md Bl00dy p0rkis 🤬
https://t.co/fKfgcNRTqC
@areesha8md Bl00dy p0rkis 🤬
https://t.co/fKfgcNRTqC
@sabeer The same clowns who think telling a child “no” kills critical thinking throw a tantrum every time someone tells them “no”, then spend their entire adult lives parroting the same five opinions like toddlers with Wi-Fi.
@Anushitiwari22 @DelhiPolice Haan Khala, Lahore vich baith ke tainu Delhi sarhdi vi dikh gayi? Wah ji wah, nazar taan baaz ton vi tez aa, bas sach vekhan vele kamzor ho jandi aa.
Come on Taklu Uncle Calling it “misplaced loyalty” is ridiculous.
We’re talking about an Indian company whose ports handle nearly 30% of the country’s cargo and which operates several major airports. You think protecting infrastructure of that scale is just about defending a billionaire?
Every major economy protects its strategic infrastructure. Ports, airports, power plants and logistics networks keep businesses running and millions of people employed.
Of course, the company should face scrutiny and be held accountable for any wrongdoing. But there’s a difference between demanding accountability and wanting a major Indian infrastructure company to collapse.
A billionaire losing money is one thing. Critical infrastructure being disrupted is a problem for the entire country.
Funny how protecting national infrastructure suddenly becomes “blind loyalty” when the company happens to be Indian-owned.
Indians have a strange understanding of nationalism. They seem more concerned about protecting Adani’s rights than protecting their own economic future. When did defending a billionaire become more patriotic than defending the interests of 1.4 billion Indians? That’s not nationalism. That’s misplaced loyalty.
Come on Taklu uncle, Calling it “misplaced loyalty” is ridiculous.
We’re talking about an Indian company whose ports handle nearly 30% of the country’s cargo and which operates several major airports. You think protecting infrastructure of that scale is just about defending a billionaire?
Every major economy protects its strategic infrastructure. Ports, airports, power plants and logistics networks keep businesses running and millions of people employed.
Of course, the company should face scrutiny and be held accountable for any wrongdoing. But there’s a difference between demanding accountability and wanting a major Indian infrastructure company to collapse.
A billionaire losing money is one thing. Critical infrastructure being disrupted is a problem for the entire country.
Funny how protecting national infrastructure suddenly becomes “blind loyalty” when the company happens to be Indian-owned.
Five negative reviews out of seven and you’ve already declared Ramayana a disaster? Seriously?
That’s your big “reality check”? Cherry-picking a handful of international reviews before the film has even opened in India?
Seven Rotten Tomatoes reviews aren’t enough to judge a film of this scale. But apparently, they’re enough for you to write its obituary.
And funny how you conveniently skipped the positive ones.
IndieWire gave it a B and praised its epic scale. Screen Rant rated it 7/10 and appreciated the visuals and technical execution. Metacritic sits at 56 from just four reviews, which means mixed reception, not universal rejection.
There’s also the question of which version these critics actually watched. Some of the harshest complaints about wooden performances, awkward lip-sync and soulless CGI reportedly came from the shorter English-dubbed cut that used AI lip-syncing.
How about judging the original Hindi version before declaring the entire film a failure?
Meanwhile, reactions from the LA premiere tell a different story. Viewers have praised Ranbir’s portrayal of Rama, called Yash’s Ravana magnetic, and described the film as an emotional spectacle. One even compared the experience to watching The Lord of the Rings for the first time.
But I suppose those audience reactions don’t count because they don’t fit your narrative?
And please, let’s not pretend Western critics have always understood Indian mythological storytelling. Remember how RRR was dismissed by some before audiences embraced it internationally?
Nobody is saying Ramayana should be immune to criticism. If the acting is weak, the VFX disappoint or the storytelling falls flat, criticise it all you want.
But there’s a difference between genuine criticism and selectively collecting negative reviews to declare victory five days before release.
You want people to stop dismissing criticism as propaganda? Fair enough.
Then stop treating seven early reviews, some reportedly based on a different cut, as the final verdict on a film millions haven’t even watched.
Let the Indian audience see it. Let the reviews come in. Let the box office numbers speak.
Until then, calling five negative reviews a “reality check” says more about your eagerness to see the film fail than about the film itself.
5 NEGATIVE REVIEWS OUT OF 7. That's a reality check! 🍅
Rotten Tomatoes' early reviews of #Ramayana aren't looking promising for Namit Malhotra. 🥲
Critics are calling out “wooden acting,” “soulless AI programming” & “eye-sore CGI.” Only 2 out of 7 reviews are positive so far. Massive budget, astronomical hype, years of anticipation - yet critics seem far from impressed.
Is this what happens when ambition gets bigger than execution? Stop dismissing every criticism as propaganda. Devotion deserves respect, but cinema deserves honest criticism.
A legendary story, a monumental budget, and apparently, some serious red flags.
Will you still blame the critics?
#RottenTomatoes
Five negative reviews out of seven and you’ve already declared Ramayana a disaster? Seriously?
That’s your big “reality check”? Cherry-picking a handful of international reviews before the film has even opened in India?
Seven Rotten Tomatoes reviews aren’t enough to judge a film of this scale. But apparently, they’re enough for you to write its obituary.
And funny how you conveniently skipped the positive ones.
IndieWire gave it a B and praised its epic scale. Screen Rant rated it 7/10 and appreciated the visuals and technical execution. Metacritic sits at 56 from just four reviews, which means mixed reception, not universal rejection.
There’s also the question of which version these critics actually watched. Some of the harshest complaints about wooden performances, awkward lip-sync and soulless CGI reportedly came from the shorter English-dubbed cut that used AI lip-syncing.
How about judging the original Hindi version before declaring the entire film a failure?
Meanwhile, reactions from the LA premiere tell a different story. Viewers have praised Ranbir’s portrayal of Rama, called Yash’s Ravana magnetic, and described the film as an emotional spectacle. One even compared the experience to watching The Lord of the Rings for the first time.
But I suppose those audience reactions don’t count because they don’t fit your narrative?
And please, let’s not pretend Western critics have always understood Indian mythological storytelling. Remember how RRR was dismissed by some before audiences embraced it internationally?
Nobody is saying Ramayana should be immune to criticism. If the acting is weak, the VFX disappoint or the storytelling falls flat, criticise it all you want.
But there’s a difference between genuine criticism and selectively collecting negative reviews to declare victory five days before release.
You want people to stop dismissing criticism as propaganda? Fair enough.
Then stop treating seven early reviews, some reportedly based on a different cut, as the final verdict on a film millions haven’t even watched.
Let the Indian audience see it. Let the reviews come in. Let the box office numbers speak.
Until then, calling five negative reviews a “reality check” says more about your eagerness to see the film fail than about the film itself.
Rishi bhai, 22 likes and you’ve already appointed yourself a film trade analyst?
Namit Malhotra’s Ramayana is apparently a vanity project. North India has been ignored. The ₹4,000 crore budget is a PR stunt. Hans Zimmer’s music isn’t devotional enough. Ranbir and Sai Pallavi have no chemistry. And now two different cuts are supposedly another marketing disaster.
Dude, the film hasn’t even been fully released and you’ve already written its obituary.
Since when did putting a producer’s name on a major film become a scandal? Baahubali, RRR and Kalki all pursued international audiences. Why exactly should Ramayana limit itself to India?
And having a longer Indian cut and a tighter international version isn’t some grand conspiracy. Different versions for different markets aren’t unheard of.
As for the ₹4,000 crore figure, trade reports have been throwing around budget estimates for ages. Question the numbers all you want, but don’t treat every reported figure as an audited production expense.
The VFX, Hans Zimmer’s score and Ranbir-Sai’s chemistry deserve criticism if they don’t work. But shouldn’t we actually see the finished film before declaring all three failures?
You’ve listed six “major missteps” with the confidence of someone who attended every marketing meeting at Namit Malhotra’s office.
Then, after declaring the whole thing a PR disaster, you casually end with “drop your thoughts.”
Of course. Nothing brings engagement quite like manufacturing a controversy before the audience has even watched the film.
If the audience genuinely feels disconnected, the reviews and box office will make that clear.
Until then, your 5,000-view thread with 22 likes isn’t exactly a trade report.
The audience will decide whether Ramayana succeeds. Not your prematurely written X thread.
Was the execution of #Ramayana doomed by its own marketing choices? 🤔
Across X and trade forums, the audience has highlighted these major missteps:
> The Tag ("Namit Malhotra's Ramayana"): Putting a producer's vanity name on a sacred epic turned off core fans right away.
> Ignoring North India: Zero real ground promotions in the Hindi heartland. They ran to LA premieres and international press, forgetting the main domestic audience.
> Confusion Over 2 Cuts: Cutting 30 minutes for the West while giving India a 195-minute version created unnecessary confusion about the story's pacing.
> Flexing the ₹4,000 Cr Budget: Boasting about massive money set an impossible visual bar that the actual VFX couldn't match.
> Music Disconnect: Even with AR Rahman and Hans Zimmer, the score feels like a Western action film instead of hitting deep devotional roots.
> Wrong Pitching & Casting: The promotion made it look more like a Yash action film, while Ranbir Kapoor and Sai Pallavi lacked classic screen connection.
Big budgets don't matter if you disconnect from the real audience.
Is this the biggest PR failure for a mega-budget Indian movie recently?
Drop your thoughts below
#RanbirKapoor #Yash
Namit Malhotra’s Ramayana is apparently a vanity project. North India has been ignored. The ₹4,000 crore budget is a PR stunt. Hans Zimmer’s music isn’t devotional enough. Ranbir and Sai Pallavi have no chemistry. And now two different cuts are supposedly another marketing disaster.
Dude, the film hasn’t even been fully released and you’ve already written its obituary.
Since when did putting a producer’s name on a major film become a scandal? Baahubali, RRR and Kalki all pursued international audiences. Why exactly should Ramayana limit itself to India?
And having a longer Indian cut and a tighter international version isn’t some grand conspiracy. Different versions for different markets aren’t unheard of.
As for the ₹4,000 crore figure, trade reports have been throwing around budget estimates for ages. Question the numbers all you want, but don’t treat every reported figure as an audited production expense.
The VFX, Hans Zimmer’s score and Ranbir-Sai’s chemistry deserve criticism if they don’t work. But shouldn’t we actually see the finished film before declaring all three failures?
You’ve listed six “major missteps” with the confidence of someone who attended every marketing meeting at Namit Malhotra’s office.
Then, after declaring the whole thing a PR disaster, you casually end with “drop your thoughts.”
Of course. Nothing brings engagement quite like manufacturing a controversy before the audience has even watched the film.
If the audience genuinely feels disconnected, the reviews and box office will make that clear.
Until then, your 5,000-view thread with 22 likes isn’t exactly a trade report.
The audience will decide whether Ramayana succeeds. Not your prematurely written X thread.
Drone footage from above shows the crater and scorched ground where the Learjet hit in Palm Beach, Florida. Almost nothing left of the plane.
Local resident’s shot (credit: Skymaticsfla) reveals how close it came to the road and nearby homes after diving at extreme speed. All 9 on board killed. The impact left a massive hole and buckled the roadway.
The final audio from the Florida Learjet crash is absolutely terrifying.
A Learjet 60 carrying nine people was flying from Austin, Texas, to the Bahamas when something went horribly wrong over Palm Beach County on November 1.
The pilot’s desperate Mayday call says it all.
“MAYDAY, MAYDAY! We’re descending 10,000 feet per minute!”
Seconds later, the situation was completely out of control. The aircraft was reportedly dropping at more than 20,000 feet per minute.
Then came the heartbreaking final words:
“LOOK OUTSIDE, JACK… HOLY F**K, WE’RE OUT OF TIME!”
The jet plunged almost vertically towards the ground and exploded in a massive fireball near a busy road. Dashcam footage captured the horrifying impact, just metres from nearby homes.
All nine people on board were killed.
The crew had reported icing, turbulence and precipitation while flying at around 35,000 feet. Flight data showed an extraordinary descent rate, reportedly exceeding 30,000 feet per minute.
The FAA and NTSB are investigating what caused the aircraft to lose control.
Just imagine being in that cockpit, knowing you’re falling thousands of feet every few seconds and there’s almost nothing you can do.
Was it severe icing, a loss of control or something else entirely?
What do you think happened at 35,000 feet?
Two Muslim employees wearing Walmart’s “Happy to Help” vests allegedly harass a woman for filming her own shopping trip, hurl insults at her and even make throat-slitting gestures.
Some way to say “Happy to Help.”
This isn’t simply a training issue. If the footage is authentic, we’re looking at employees openly intimidating a customer while wearing their company’s uniform.
And let’s be clear, threatening someone doesn’t become acceptable because of their religion, beliefs or personal objections to being filmed.
Walmart needs to investigate what happened and take action against anyone responsible. A customer shouldn’t have to worry about being threatened while shopping.
As for the “tiny tip of the iceberg” claim, if there are more incidents, bring out the evidence. People deserve to know whether Walmart has ignored similar complaints.
The employees’ religious identity doesn’t need to be hidden. Neither does their alleged conduct. But accountability starts with holding the actual offenders responsible.
@areesha8md Bl00dy p0rkis 🤬
https://t.co/fKfgcNRTqC
Another fake anti-India narrative exposed.
First, get your facts straight. This video is NOT from India.
The incident reportedly took place in Arnavutköy, Istanbul, Turkey, around mid-October 2026.
Turkish media, including Sözcü, reported that a young foreign woman was allegedly forced into a car, assaulted and had her hair cut. The attackers reportedly filmed the incident and circulated the footage online.
You can even hear Turkish being spoken in the video.
And here’s where the misinformation gets worse. The reports describe assault and forced hair-cutting. They do not confirm any rape.
Yet someone decided to circulate the same footage with a completely fabricated story about a female tourist being raped in India, dragging “ordinary Muslim women” into the narrative.
Where’s the evidence? Where’s the matching police report? Where’s the verified Indian news report?
You can’t take a disturbing video from Turkey, slap an anti-India caption on it and expect everyone to believe it.
A woman was allegedly assaulted, and instead of focusing on what happened to her, people are using her suffering to spread misinformation about another country.
At least verify the location before manufacturing outrage.
Another fake anti-India narrative exposed.
First, get your facts straight. This video is NOT from India.
The incident reportedly took place in Arnavutköy, Istanbul, Turkey, around mid-October 2026.
Turkish media, including Sözcü, reported that a young foreign woman was allegedly forced into a car, assaulted and had her hair cut. The attackers reportedly filmed the incident and circulated the footage online.
You can even hear Turkish being spoken in the video.
And here’s where the misinformation gets worse. The reports describe assault and forced hair-cutting. They do not confirm any rape.
Yet someone decided to circulate the same footage with a completely fabricated story about a female tourist being raped in India, dragging “ordinary Muslim women” into the narrative.
Where’s the evidence? Where’s the matching police report? Where’s the verified Indian news report?
You can’t take a disturbing video from Turkey, slap an anti-India caption on it and expect everyone to believe it.
A woman was allegedly assaulted, and instead of focusing on what happened to her, people are using her suffering to spread misinformation about another country.
At least verify the location before manufacturing outrage.
A female tourist visiting India was allegedly raped and mistreated, and her hair was also cut off. This incident raises serious concerns about women's safety in India, not only for foreign tourists but also for ordinary Muslim women living there.
For years, this crowd lectured everyone about taking to the streets, whether it was Jamia, CAA or Palestine. If you weren’t protesting, you were apparently part of the problem.
Now suddenly, when showing up means sitting through a four-hour protest themselves, we’re getting lectures on “crip time” and how activism from bed is just as meaningful.
Nobody is denying that disabilities, chronic illness and physical limitations are real. People contribute in different ways, and that’s perfectly legitimate.
But let’s not pretend posting from the comfort of your bedroom carries the same personal risk as standing on the streets, facing police lathis, arrests and tear gas.
Online activism has its place. So does recognising your physical limits. The hypocrisy begins when you shame others for not showing up, then demand understanding when you can’t.
Apparently, street protests are mandatory for everyone else, but optional when the inconvenience reaches your own doorstep.
Being on ground a lot lately has made me realise how absolutely opposed I am to shaming people with invisible disabilities and chronic illnesses for not physically showing up to political events, especially flash protests.
Our movements need disability justice. We need to understand crip time.
Not every body can move at the speed political organising demands. Not everyone can stand for four hours, travel across a city at a moment’s notice, run when police arrive, risk detention, or recover from doing all of this
Yet we have created a very ableist idea of political commitment: the bodies we can physically see are rewarded as the most political.
Yes, the people protesting, getting detained, documenting and reporting from the ground are doing essential political work. But so is the chronically ill person organising from bed. So is the disabled person researching, writing, fundraising, designing, documenting, doing mutual aid or making somebody else’s presence on ground possible.
Physical visibility is not the only way to practise your politics.
Just as movements must make space for women, Muslim women, queer and trans people, they must make space for disabled and chronically ill people. Accessibility and disability justice cannot be an afterthought to liberation politics.
There is no single correct body with which to resist.
If your body couldn’t show up somewhere you desperately wanted to be, you do not need to prove your politics by hurting it.
Shaming people is not okay. And ableism should have no space in our movements.
Last Seen Users on Sotwe
Turkish Amateurs
Seen from Turkey
MiLLi OlAmAyAn GeNç😟
Seen from Turkey
UKTHI KALEM
Seen from Indonesia
คลิปเกย์ #ควยคนหล่อ
มือใหม่อยากลองสวิง💥สระแก้ว
Seen from Thailand
pemburu video viral
Seen from Jordan
番茄罐头（防敏减重调教棒已上线）
Seen from Japan
Kazım sert
Seen from Turkey
AmatPorn🍑
Seen from Turkey
yacine
Seen from France
Trends for you
Most Popular Users
Elon Musk
@elonmusk
241.5M followers
Barack Obama
@barackobama
118.8M followers
Cristiano Ronaldo
@cristiano
114.5M followers
Donald J. Trump
@realdonaldtrump
111.9M followers
Narendra Modi
@narendramodi
107.1M followers
Rihanna
@rihanna
98.7M followers
NASA
@nasa
92.3M followers
Justin Bieber
@justinbieber
91.8M followers
KATY PERRY
@katyperry
90M followers
Taylor Swift
@taylorswift13
84M followers
Lady Gaga
@ladygaga
75.5M followers
Virat Kohli
@imvkohli
73.4M followers
Kim Kardashian
@kimkardashian
70.8M followers
YouTube
@youtube
68.7M followers
Neymar Jr
@neymarjr
66.4M followers
Bill Gates
@billgates
65.2M followers
Selena Gomez
@selenagomez
63.1M followers
The Ellen Show
@theellenshow
62.2M followers
CNN
@cnn
61.7M followers
X
@x
60.7M followers