Their building was done before world became aware of rights of endogenous people, environment protection and corporate giants.
Appropriate anger has already been expressed about this comment in all media and suitable explanation and retraction done already. But I want to look at this as citizen.
#Thread
Their building was done before world became aware of rights of endogenous people, environment protection and corporate giants.
We desperately need developement for good of our population and to face external challenges but we NEED democracy.
Opposing anything and everything that government proposes seems to be only proof of existence of opposite for now.
This option is forever is highjacked by either politicos, big corporates, minor political parties or suspected foreign funding.
That's where I feel lost as a common man on street who needs to earn living on daily basis and pay taxes.
More from Fraud
🚨 SMARTMATIC + Venezuela = Election fraud disaster
@SidneyPowell1
CONTINUE⬇️
In a document found on Wikileaks:
“Smartmatic was founded in the late 90s by 3 Venezuelans, Antonio Mugica, Alberto Anzola, and Roger Pinate.
The electronic voting company went from a small technology startup to a market player in just a few
“Mugica has told Poloffs on several occasions that Anzola, Pinate, and he are the owners of Smartmatic, though they have a list of about 30 investors who remain anonymous.”
“Prior to 2004, SMARTMATIC had 0 election experience and otherwise was a fledgling business.
Reportedly critical to the SBC consortium’s award of the $91 mil 2004 recall election contract from the Chávez dominated CNE was a $150,000 + investment by the Venezuelan government”
https://t.co/zBeQryUqHw
@SidneyPowell1
CONTINUE⬇️
In a document found on Wikileaks:
“Smartmatic was founded in the late 90s by 3 Venezuelans, Antonio Mugica, Alberto Anzola, and Roger Pinate.
The electronic voting company went from a small technology startup to a market player in just a few
“Mugica has told Poloffs on several occasions that Anzola, Pinate, and he are the owners of Smartmatic, though they have a list of about 30 investors who remain anonymous.”
“Prior to 2004, SMARTMATIC had 0 election experience and otherwise was a fledgling business.
Reportedly critical to the SBC consortium’s award of the $91 mil 2004 recall election contract from the Chávez dominated CNE was a $150,000 + investment by the Venezuelan government”
https://t.co/zBeQryUqHw
A thread on attempted election fraud in Canada: First, most breaches of election law here are related to financing, not illegal voting or ballot-box stuffing. And most are minor. That’s because our elxn finance laws are extremely tight and contribution/spending limits low. 1/
I covered two of the best-known cases in recent years: “robocalls” in 2011 election and the “in-and-out” affair of 2006. You probably heard a lot about the former and maybe nothing of the latter. Both were important for different reasons. 2/
In robocalls, the Conservative party’s voter-tracking database, CIMS, was used to make fraudulent automated calls to about 7,000 identified Liberal voters in Guelph, Ontario, directing them to the wrong polling location. The scheme didn’t work. The Liberals won the riding. 3/
Elections Canada caught on to the scheme on the day the calls were made, election day, and began investigating almost immediately. The long and complex investigation found the calls originated with someone working for the Conservative candidate in Guelph. 4/
After a trial, a lone campaign staffer was found guilty. He served jail time. The judge said it appeared to him others were likely involved but no one else was charged. Throughout, the CPC denied any knowledge of the scheme. 5/
Hey Canada, can we talk about how Conservatives are fundraising based on dangerous lies & how it needs to stop immediately? #cdnpoli pic.twitter.com/2LSHcJtsMf
— \U0001f142\U0001f130\U0001f13c\U0001f138 (@samifouad) January 8, 2021
I covered two of the best-known cases in recent years: “robocalls” in 2011 election and the “in-and-out” affair of 2006. You probably heard a lot about the former and maybe nothing of the latter. Both were important for different reasons. 2/
In robocalls, the Conservative party’s voter-tracking database, CIMS, was used to make fraudulent automated calls to about 7,000 identified Liberal voters in Guelph, Ontario, directing them to the wrong polling location. The scheme didn’t work. The Liberals won the riding. 3/
Elections Canada caught on to the scheme on the day the calls were made, election day, and began investigating almost immediately. The long and complex investigation found the calls originated with someone working for the Conservative candidate in Guelph. 4/
After a trial, a lone campaign staffer was found guilty. He served jail time. The judge said it appeared to him others were likely involved but no one else was charged. Throughout, the CPC denied any knowledge of the scheme. 5/
You May Also Like
"I lied about my basic beliefs in order to keep a prestigious job. Now that it will be zero-cost to me, I have a few things to say."
We know that elite institutions like the one Flier was in (partial) charge of rely on irrelevant status markers like private school education, whiteness, legacy, and ability to charm an old white guy at an interview.
Harvard's discriminatory policies are becoming increasingly well known, across the political spectrum (see, e.g., the recent lawsuit on discrimination against East Asian applications.)
It's refreshing to hear a senior administrator admits to personally opposing policies that attempt to remedy these basic flaws. These are flaws that harm his institution's ability to do cutting-edge research and to serve the public.
Harvard is being eclipsed by institutions that have different ideas about how to run a 21st Century institution. Stanford, for one; the UC system; the "public Ivys".
As a dean of a major academic institution, I could not have said this. But I will now. Requiring such statements in applications for appointments and promotions is an affront to academic freedom, and diminishes the true value of diversity, equity of inclusion by trivializing it. https://t.co/NfcI5VLODi
— Jeffrey Flier (@jflier) November 10, 2018
We know that elite institutions like the one Flier was in (partial) charge of rely on irrelevant status markers like private school education, whiteness, legacy, and ability to charm an old white guy at an interview.
Harvard's discriminatory policies are becoming increasingly well known, across the political spectrum (see, e.g., the recent lawsuit on discrimination against East Asian applications.)
It's refreshing to hear a senior administrator admits to personally opposing policies that attempt to remedy these basic flaws. These are flaws that harm his institution's ability to do cutting-edge research and to serve the public.
Harvard is being eclipsed by institutions that have different ideas about how to run a 21st Century institution. Stanford, for one; the UC system; the "public Ivys".
