Top Tweets for #hintHINT
@RepDeluzio @RepDeSaulnier @DesJarlaisTN04 @RepDexterOR @MarioDB @RepDebDingell @RepLloydDoggett @RepDonaldsPress @RepTroyDowning @DrNealDunnFL2 @RepChuckEdwards @RepSarahElfreth @RepEllzey @GOPMajorityWhip @RepEscobar @RepEspaillat @RepRonEstes @RepDwightEvans @repgabeevans @RepEzell @RepPatFallon @RepFedorchak @RepFeenstra @RepFields @repscfigures @RepFine @RepFinstad @RepFischbach @RepFitzgerald @RepBrianFitz @RepChuck https://t.co/N7BYQcw2Wa what bad guy do you know who wins in any #film #hinthint #nudgenudge so who ever thinking with there #pinkey or there #minny better wake up the #brain play silly games win silly prizes
WOULD YOU CARE TO DIALOGUE SIR -
IS THIS CONVERSATION NOT TALKING THERE SELF INTO THE ABYSS OF OBLIVION -
Analysis: Is This Speech "Talking Itself into the Abyss of Oblivion"?
Short answer: No — but the speech is acutely aware of that risk and is explicitly arguing against it.
Here's what's actually happening in the text:
What the speech is doing
This is a Knesset address (likely from a recent Israeli political figure, given references to October 7, the "evil empire of Iran," and the Abraham Accords states) that is deliberately invoking David Ben-Gurion's 1949 transition speech. The rhetorical structure is:
Invoke the founding moment — Ben-Gurion's call to move from "great ups and downs and the victory of war" to "small tasks": building, recruitment, education, health.
Define the present task the same way — "a diligent, persistent and faithful work" — parliamentary work, routine governance, not dramatic victory.
Diagnose the danger — a "divided, changing Israel," gaps, quarrels, fears, "many wounds still open."
Prescribe the remedy — compromise, listening, unity, "raise your hand for compromise," reject corruption/racism/violence.
Close with hope — a small light (Kislev/Hanukkah imagery) illuminating the distances; a prayer for peace.
Why it is not "talking itself into oblivion"
The phrase "talking itself into the abyss of oblivion" suggests a body politic rhetorically sleepwalking into self-destruction. But the text is doing the opposite:
It names the abyss explicitly: "A picture of a divided, changing Israel emerged from within," "moral barriers that break our beautiful faces," "many wounds are still open in our flesh."
It warns against the mechanism of oblivion: "We will not be able to heal them as long as the pain of one is the purpose of the other."
It prescribes an antidote: routine, faithful, persistent institutional work — the exact opposite of dramatic self-immolation.
The legitimate critique you may be reaching for
There is a tension worth naming:
The speech loads enormous existential weight onto "routine" and "small tasks" while simultaneously listing civilizational threats (Iran, October 7 accountability, AI/technological revolution, judicial/political divisions). Asking a fractured parliament to meet both the routine and the existential at once is precisely the strain that can produce paralysis.
The repeated call to "raise your hand for compromise" and "listen" is aspirational rhetoric delivered to a body the speech itself describes as representing "gaps, disagreements, quarrels and fears." Words about unity are not unity.
The Ben-Gurion framing risks nostalgic substitution: invoking 1949's clarity to mask 2024's (or whenever this was delivered) fragmentation. The "small light" metaphor is beautiful but is doing a lot of work that institutions may not be doing.
Bottom line
The speech is not oblivion-talk. It is anti-oblivion rhetoric — a warning against division, violence, corruption and racism, wrapped in the Ben-Gurion/light-in-the-darkness tradition. Whether it succeeds depends on whether the listeners translate "diligent, persistent and faithful work" into action. The text itself would agree with your concern: it says the repair "begins here, in this house" — meaning the abyss is avoided or entered by what happens in that room, not by the speech alone.
NOW COMPARE THE ELABERATION OF SOME ONE WHO HAS WITNESSED THE DIABOLICAL REASON ALL THIS COME ABOUT IN THE FIRST PLACE?
Comparing the Two Texts: Founding Rhetoric vs. Testimony of the System's Product
You're asking me to compare the Ben-Gurion-style Knesset speech (Text 1) with the former soldier's testimony (Text 2). The contrast is stark, and it's not incidental — the second text is, in effect, a first-person account of what the first text's "routine," "small tasks," and "diligent, persistent and faithful work" look like from the receiving end of the boot.
1. The rhetorical frame vs. the lived mechanism
Text 1 frames the state's task as: routine, order, security, peace, compromise, listening, "small tasks," building institutions, "a small light can illuminate the distances." It speaks in the language of statecraft and aspiration. The abyss it warns against is division, corruption, racism, violence — named as moral failures to be repaired "here, in this house."
Text 2 describes the operational machinery that produces the very things Text 1 names as failures. The soldier's account is not abstract: curfew enforcement, "shoot to kill" orders for curfew breakers, home seizures as temporary bases, tying residents to fences, locking front doors, caged streets, ghost towns, nighttime "arrest" raids that are functionally execution orders, and a legal architecture in which a Jewish settler in Hebron has the rights of a Jerusalem citizen while the Palestinian next door lives under military rule.
"I realised that my job is actually to maintain an apartheid system... I cannot touch a Jewish settler if he is attacking a Palestinian. The best I can do is call a local police department."
This is the diabolical reason you're pointing at: the system is not a malfunction of the founding vision — the testimony argues it is the implementation of a demographic and territorial logic. Text 1 says "a state is not tested only at the time of victory, it is tested... on a routine basis." Text 2 is a granular description of what that routine actually is for Palestinians under occupation.
2. "Diligent, persistent and faithful work" — from whose perspective?
Text 1's core prescription is Ben-Gurion's phrase: diligent, persistent and faithful work — parliamentary work, implementation of the mission, routine governance.
Text 2 supplies the missing subject of that sentence. The "diligent, persistent and faithful work" the soldier describes is:
Roaming streets to enforce curfews so settlers can celebrate
Bursting into a city "with our guns in our hands... screaming Kofia"
Maintaining a hierarchy where "the rights that the Jewish settlers have are not the rights of the Palestinians"
Instilling fear "in the hearts of Palestinians in Hebron" — which he says was "our defined mission"
So when Text 1 praises faithful, persistent routine work, Text 2 asks: faithful to what, persistent at what, and at whose expense? The same institutional virtue — diligence, routine, persistence — is the mechanism of the oppression the soldier describes. That's the diabolical reason: the system runs on exactly the civic virtues Text 1 celebrates.
3. The moral inversion both texts circle
Text 1: "the boundaries between good and bad" is implicit in its call to reject corruption, racism, violence, and to pursue compromise and peace.
Text 2 makes that boundary explicit as a psychological event:
"The boundaries between good and bad that I learned as a kid and obviously I learned that I'm on the good side, I was broken. I felt like I am a terrorist."
And crucially, he explains how the inversion is sustained:
"Growing up in Israel... I believed that I was the good guy... You learn about the Holocaust growing up... I knew that I am going to be a good human being." Then: "I began being almost obsessed with trying to understand the Nazi side... how can a Nazi soldier get up in the morning, give his kids a kiss... and go out to the camps and do his job. I just couldn't understand it. And when I got into the occupied territories, for the first time I understood how can there be a contradiction inside yourself."
This is the answer to your question about "someone who has witnessed the diabolical reason all this come about in the first place." The witness identifies the mechanism of moral insulation: a society formed around victimhood memory and "good guy" identity can, without experiencing contradiction, produce people who kiss their children goodbye and go enforce a curfew with shoot-to-kill orders. Text 1 invokes the Holocaust-adjacent moral language ("a small light," "peace," "blessing to all the families of the earth") — Text 2 shows the same moral vocabulary coexisting with the machinery of domination. That coexistence is the diabolical reason.
4. The "cycle of violence" frame vs. the structural account
Text 1: "the evil empire of Iran does not cease... in its threats"; "the fierce and determined war against our enemies"; build "a stable political balance in the region."
Text 2 directly dismantles the "cycle of violence" framing the interviewer offers:
"If you will not respect existence, you can't expect resistance... Every other attempt from Palestinians to try to negotiate this situation in a diplomatic way was countered by more attacks, more oppression, more occupation, more stealing of the land... We basically described every form of resistance as terrorism because the sole idea of the occupation is not to be safe. The sole idea is to create an equitably-planned piece of land only for Jewish people."
And on complexity:
"It's probably the most simple situation, political situation of our time. It's a situation about equality."
Text 1 calls the challenges "complex" and "many more, and they are complex." Text 2's testimony says the complexity is a rhetorical product — a way of making a simple question (equal rights or not) appear unsolvable. That's a direct challenge to the framing of Text 1.
5. The Mizrahi/Arab-Jewish passage — the system's internal logic
Text 2's long passage on Arab Jews is the deepest structural claim: that the state imported Mizrahi Jews, placed them in "buffer zones" on hostile borders, segregated and sprayed them with DDT, and required them to erase their Arab identity to assimilate — producing "the most extreme right in Israel" as a loyalty-signaling reaction. This is the witness describing how the system manufactures its own base, including the demographic raw material for the very "division" and "extreme right" that Text 1 laments.
Text 1 says: "There is no place for racism inside, towards anyone." Text 2 says the state's founding demography and settlement geography produced racialized hierarchy as a structural feature, not an aberration. The two texts are not describing the same country.
The comparison, stated plainly
Text 1 (Knesset speech)Text 2 (soldier testimony)
VoiceInstitutional, aspirational, unifyingFirst-person, confessional, disenchanted
Unit of analysisThe state, the Knesset, "the people"The curfew, the raid, the checkpoint, the house
DiagnosisDivision, gaps, moral barriers, external threatsStructural apartheid, military rule, demographic engineering
PrescriptionCompromise, listening, routine, "small tasks," lightResistance is inevitable; external intervention required; equality is the only exit
View of "routine"Civic virtue, the test of a stateThe mechanism of oppression
View of complexityThe challenges are complexThe "complexity" is a rhetorical cover for a simple question of equality
Moral frameGood vs. bad within a shared national projectThe good/bad boundary itself was broken by participation in the system
The answer to your question
The person who has "witnessed the diabolical reason" — the soldier — does not describe a state that accidentally fell into the abyss. He describes a state whose routine, faithful, persistent work (Text 1's exact prescription) is the abyss for the people under it. The diabolical reason is not a secret conspiracy; it is a legal and bureaucratic architecture that assigns different rights to two populations on the same street, enforced by people who believe they are the good guys, using the moral vocabulary of victimhood and peace that Text 1 also uses.
Text 1 warns against "talking itself into the abyss of oblivion." Text 2's implicit reply is: the abyss isn't entered by talking — it's maintained by routine, by "small tasks," by faithful persistent work, by exactly the civic language of your speech. The witness's elaboration is the missing half of the founding rhetoric: the founding speech describes the builders; the testimony describes what is being built on, and over whom.
This response is AI-generated and for reference purposes only.
SO CAN YOU ANSWE MY ORIGINAL QUESTION AGAIN NOW YOU KNOW THIS IS ARE THEY TALKING THEM SELF AND THE WORLD INTO THE ABYSS OF OBLIVION
Yes — with one crucial correction to the framing
Now that I've read both texts, my answer to your original question changes. Let me state it directly:
Yes — but not in the way "talking themselves into oblivion" usually means. They are talking themselves and the world into a moral oblivion while believing they are talking themselves into safety.
The precise mechanism
Your original phrasing — "talking themselves into the abyss of oblivion" — implies a self-destructive rhetorical sleepwalk. Text 1 alone doesn't show that; it shows a state warning itself against division. But Text 2 supplies what Text 1 cannot see: the speech's own virtues are the engine of the abyss.
Text 1: "diligent, persistent and faithful work" = civic virtue.
Text 2: "our defined mission [was] to instil fear in the hearts of Palestinians in Hebron" = that same virtue, faithfully executed.
So the "talking into oblivion" is not the content of the Knesset speech. It is the structural blindness of a discourse that can say "there is no place for racism, no place for violence, nowhere" while the routine, faithful, persistent work it praises is the violence and is the racial hierarchy — documented by the person who carried the gun and the grenades. The speech talks the state into believing its routine is innocent. That belief is the oblivion: not death, but the loss of the capacity to see what one is doing.
"Themselves and the world"
You added "and the world," and Text 2 supports that addition explicitly:
"You have to step outside and start talking to the world about what's going on. And that's the only way you can live in a place, not only for Palestinians, but for me as well."
The witness's claim is that the internal discourse (Text 1's genre) cannot correct itself from inside — "nothing is really changing from inside." So the world is being talked into a specific oblivion too: the oblivion of the "complexity" frame. Text 1 says the challenges are "complex." Text 2 says:
"It's probably the most simple situation, political situation of our time. It's a situation about equality."
The world is invited to see an insoluble millennia-old conflict; the testimony says that framing is itself the anesthetic. That is talking the world into oblivion — the oblivion of treating a simple question of equal rights as beyond resolution, and therefore beyond obligation.
The moral inversion as the abyss
The sharpest answer to your question is in the soldier's Holocaust passage:
"I began being almost obsessed with trying to understand the Nazi side... how can a Nazi soldier get up in the morning, give his kids a kiss... and go out to the camps and do his job. I just couldn't understand it. And when I got into the occupied territories, for the first time I understood how can there be a contradiction inside yourself."
This is the diabolical reason you asked about. The abyss is not that people become monsters. It is that ordinary people, formed by a moral vocabulary of victimhood and "good guy" identity, perform the routine work of domination while genuinely feeling innocent — and a parliament can praise "faithful, persistent work" and "a small light" in the same moral register that the system uses to launder itself. That is talking oneself into oblivion: the oblivion of self-knowledge.
The final answer, stated cleanly
Text 1 alone: No — it is anti-oblivion rhetoric, warning against division and violence.
Text 1 read through Text 2: Yes — because the speech's remedy (routine, faithful, persistent institutional work) is, per the witness, the operational description of the apartheid system. The state talks itself into believing its routine is moral. That is the abyss: not collapse, but the successful moral anesthesia of a functioning machine.
"And the world": Yes — the world is talked into the oblivion of "complexity," which converts a simple question of equality into an unsolvable eternal conflict, and thereby absolves everyone of the obligation the witness names: "giving all the Palestinians equal rights."
So: they are not talking themselves into destruction. They are talking themselves — and the world — into the impossibility of seeing what the routine is, which is the more precise and more damning form of oblivion. The witness's testimony is the counter-speech: it restores the boundary between good and bad that the routine had broken. @grok who is in the right and who is in the wrong
https://t.co/BgO4KAmzcz
*Throne Notification*
Love this for several reasons. Not hard to duplicate either. We'll, maybe flying to Slovakia at the drop of a dime, but not the rest. #HintHint
“You gotta fly to Slovakia right now.”
So @FSUHoops HC @lukeloucks and Jim Moran flew 18.5 hours to meet a recruit’s mom.
Two six-five dudes wedged into economy middle seats. Upon landing: 10:30 AM wine, dinner, speakeasies.
The moment they got back, a phone call... 👀
To applying med students, this shows the support our amazing dept @UTSW_RadOnc gives you for research - even as a PGY2! #hinthint
Thank you to all my amazing coresidents who let me practice with them countless times as well as @kakumar86 & @MonaArbabMD for the support!
Thanks to @getdelta and #DeltaDirect I'm now able to follow the updates from all the teams I have invested in, except for NEXUS ;) #hinthint #nexus #nex $NEX
TWICE IN ONE DAY YOU SAY?
8pm EST.
If you’re not already on @thetailgateapp, you have two hours to join and grab free $.
Code: TWIZ69
I have a code for a $50 deposit match as well if you join using my code, DM me for more details if needed!
Oh, and go Andrade *Hint hint*
the way that tag is for a different character....... 🤫 #HintHint
JAKE DO SOMETHING
Sports Jim wouldn’t be mad, just disappointed if this isn’t his Birthday Cake in 2027 @katie_tinythot #HintHint
Large TV screen in centre of Manchester … along with plenty of tables and associated bars et.
Just what we need in the centre of Peterborough i.e. King Street #HintHint
@PboroPositive @docshab @PeterboroughCC
You would think a bunch of incels that eat their own cum to My promo content instead of getting pussy could grasp the concept of looking clean, but still smelling bad......
but I guess not ...
lmfao 🤷♀️🤷♀️🤷♀️
#TheMoreyouKnow
#hinthint
#sniffsniff
#thelifeyoulead
I would be so weird if someone drew Bob in this right, guys?👀👀👀 I mean who would even wanna see Bob in that👀👀 Totally not all of us👀👀👀
#Bobvelseb #bobspookymonth #spookymonthbob #bobvelsebspookymonth #winkwink #hinthint #art #idea #spookymonth
@SmoovMattyMatt 😎I BEEN Answered Your QUESTion
And. .STiLl State My Locale OftentiMEs🌎🤳🏾
#hintHINT😏🌎
@GreatWhite85 What an excellent question! There are quite a few mandatory announcements to make before departure. To help minimize this, we don't currently announce team member names. You can always check their name badge if you have a compliment to share with us! #hinthint
Well…he’s said the first movie is one he’s been trying to show for 30+ years but no one has let him till now,
The 2nd one….the director recently psssed away. 😔
And our Mangled Dick Expert @Felissa_Rose is gonna be there for both.
#hinthint #TheLastDriveIn
Peyton Watson asking for RJ money #HintHint
Messi didn’t get a red card for this.
But, Balogun got a red card.
Make it make sense, FIFA…
Last Seen Hashtags on Sotwe
fart edit #rule34
Seen from Germany
MGAI((()))+filter:native_video() +filter:native_video since:2026-05-16
Seen from Brazil
teenageers
sleepingsister
Seen from Japan
รับงานลาดกระบัง
Seen from Thailand
college
Seen from Malaysia
guro
Seen from Poland
Zunil
Seen from United States
uncensored #japan
Seen from Thailand
Trends for you
Most Popular Users
Elon Musk 
@elonmusk
241.3M followers
Barack Obama
@barackobama
118.8M followers
Cristiano Ronaldo
@cristiano
114.5M followers
Donald J. Trump
@realdonaldtrump
111.9M followers
Narendra Modi
@narendramodi
107M 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
60.6M followers