1. Military Intelligence Contact: . He is confirming X’s sources, Bruce's sources, and other sources reporting that the bond redemption processing finished today Christmas Eve Thu 24 Dec and as of about 1 pm EST all banks in this country and globally started moving fully onto...
. He is confirming Mr. X’s sources saying that 2 separate groups in...
. He is confirming that bond liquidity in bond holder accounts will begin to be...
. He is confirming Mr. X’s sources saying that 2 separate groups in different geographic locations said that there is expected to be activity on the holiday as well as into the weekend and if so we in T4B will be in great shape soon thereafter next week.
More from 🇺🇸I Support Our Military & Law Enforcement🇺🇸
More from Government
I don't normally do threads like this but I did want to provide some deeper thoughts on the below and why having a video game based on a real world war crime from the same people that received CIA funding isn't the best idea.
This will go pretty in depth FYI.
The core reason why I'm doing this thread is because:
1. It's clear the developers are marketing the game a certain way.
2. This is based on something that actually happened, a war crime no less. I don't have issues with shooter games in general ofc.
Firstly, It's important to acknowledge that the Iraq war was an illegal war, based on lies, a desire for regime change and control of resources in the region.
These were lies that people believed and still believe to this day.
It's also important to mention that the action taken by these aggressors is the reason there was a battle in Fallujah in the first place. People became resistance fighters because they were left with nothing but death and destruction all around them after the illegal invasion.
This is where one of the first red flags comes up.
The game is very much from an American point of view, as shown in the description.
When it mentions Iraqi civilians, it doesn't talk about them as victims, but mentions them as being pro US, fighting alongside them.
This will go pretty in depth FYI.
I couldn't possibly guess why Six Days in Fallujah is being revived at a time when US army recruitment is at an all time low.
— Daniel Ahmad (@ZhugeEX) February 11, 2021
This reboot is from the same people that worked with the FBI and CIA on training systems and is basing its game on excusing US war crimes. pic.twitter.com/5H8vVqKh9s
The core reason why I'm doing this thread is because:
1. It's clear the developers are marketing the game a certain way.
2. This is based on something that actually happened, a war crime no less. I don't have issues with shooter games in general ofc.
Firstly, It's important to acknowledge that the Iraq war was an illegal war, based on lies, a desire for regime change and control of resources in the region.
These were lies that people believed and still believe to this day.
It's also important to mention that the action taken by these aggressors is the reason there was a battle in Fallujah in the first place. People became resistance fighters because they were left with nothing but death and destruction all around them after the illegal invasion.
This is where one of the first red flags comes up.
The game is very much from an American point of view, as shown in the description.
When it mentions Iraqi civilians, it doesn't talk about them as victims, but mentions them as being pro US, fighting alongside them.
Which metric is a better predictor of the severity of the fall surge in US states?
1) Margin of Democrat victory in Nov 2020 election
or
2) % infected through Sep 1, 2020
Can you guess which plot is which?
The left plot is based on the % infected through Sep 1, 2020. You can see that there is very little correlation with the % infected since Sep 1.
However, there is a *strong* correlation when using the margin of Biden's victory (right).
Infections % from https://t.co/WcXlfxv3Ah.
This is the strongest single variable I've seen in being able to explain the severity of this most recent wave in each state.
Not past infections / existing immunity, population density, racial makeup, latitude / weather / humidity, etc.
But political lean.
One can argue that states that lean Democrat are more likely to implement restrictions/mandates.
This is valid, so we test this by using the Government Stringency Index made by @UniofOxford.
We also see a correlation, but it's weaker (R^2=0.36 vs 0.50).
https://t.co/BxBBKwW6ta
To avoid look-ahead bias/confounding variables, here is the same analysis but using 2016 margin of victory as the predictor. Similar results.
This basically says that 2016 election results is a better predictor of the severity of the fall wave than intervention levels in 2020!
1) Margin of Democrat victory in Nov 2020 election
or
2) % infected through Sep 1, 2020
Can you guess which plot is which?
The left plot is based on the % infected through Sep 1, 2020. You can see that there is very little correlation with the % infected since Sep 1.
However, there is a *strong* correlation when using the margin of Biden's victory (right).
Infections % from https://t.co/WcXlfxv3Ah.
This is the strongest single variable I've seen in being able to explain the severity of this most recent wave in each state.
Not past infections / existing immunity, population density, racial makeup, latitude / weather / humidity, etc.
But political lean.
One can argue that states that lean Democrat are more likely to implement restrictions/mandates.
This is valid, so we test this by using the Government Stringency Index made by @UniofOxford.
We also see a correlation, but it's weaker (R^2=0.36 vs 0.50).
https://t.co/BxBBKwW6ta
To avoid look-ahead bias/confounding variables, here is the same analysis but using 2016 margin of victory as the predictor. Similar results.
This basically says that 2016 election results is a better predictor of the severity of the fall wave than intervention levels in 2020!
You May Also Like
Moderna CEO Stephane Bancel was previously CEO of bioMerieux in France from 07-10.
Alain Merieux, who owns bioMerieux, was instrumental in the creation of the Wuhan Institute of Virology P4 Lab.
The same people who helped create the virus, also helped to create the vaccines...
Moderna partnered with French Pasteur Institute in 2015 to develop mRNA vaccine technology.
Pasteur Institute partnered with the Wuhan P4 Laboratory in 2017 along with the Merieux Foundation to study emerging viruses...
https://t.co/yFsHwrNYaK
https://t.co/9M5lydBKhM
Nobel prize winning scientist Luc Montagnier asserts that Sars-Cov-2 is man-made and originated from the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
Montagnier did extensive work with the Pasteur Institute in France which was partnered with the Wuhan P4.
Merieux Foundation & the Chinese government have worked together since 1965, and partnered to study emerging pathogens in Africa in 2015.
Their research included "PATHOGENS CARRIED BY BATS" that provoke respiratory diseases.
🚨🚨🚨
https://t.co/gVwpT0ssqI
Alain Merieux, who owns bioMerieux, was instrumental in the creation of the Wuhan Institute of Virology P4 Lab.
The same people who helped create the virus, also helped to create the vaccines...
Moderna partnered with French Pasteur Institute in 2015 to develop mRNA vaccine technology.
Pasteur Institute partnered with the Wuhan P4 Laboratory in 2017 along with the Merieux Foundation to study emerging viruses...
https://t.co/yFsHwrNYaK
https://t.co/9M5lydBKhM
Nobel prize winning scientist Luc Montagnier asserts that Sars-Cov-2 is man-made and originated from the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
Montagnier did extensive work with the Pasteur Institute in France which was partnered with the Wuhan P4.
Merieux Foundation & the Chinese government have worked together since 1965, and partnered to study emerging pathogens in Africa in 2015.
Their research included "PATHOGENS CARRIED BY BATS" that provoke respiratory diseases.
🚨🚨🚨
https://t.co/gVwpT0ssqI
