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
'Peaceful transition to Military Power....'
Cannon
44
....heard around the world
NG - High Alert https://t.co/lfeSiUCCRB
We Will Never Forget
44
Stage is set
https://t.co/h6G3LCevII
Following the 44 trail of breadrumbs
https://t.co/PcX0uKUEUW
Cannon
44
....heard around the world
NG - High Alert https://t.co/lfeSiUCCRB
\U0001f4a5 BOOM \U0001f4a5
— R\u0113d.P\u012bll.Ph\u0101rm\u0101c\u012bst (@Red_Pill_Pharma) January 18, 2021
30 secs in - what do I hear?
\u2018Peaceful transition to military power\u2019
\U0001f1fa\U0001f1f8 MILITARY IS THE ONLY WAY \U0001f1fa\U0001f1f8 pic.twitter.com/9NPMT7N7Qy
We Will Never Forget
44
Stage is set
https://t.co/h6G3LCevII
The stage is set. Staged.
— JeLove (@LovesTheLight) November 7, 2020
Where? (the) Delaware.
10:44
Purple
First graphic in 98https://t.co/PKHlxp0rzS pic.twitter.com/XCx6pVQTHx
Following the 44 trail of breadrumbs
https://t.co/PcX0uKUEUW
Boom, Boom, Boom pic.twitter.com/ZcZXAgL0Qf
— JeLove (@LovesTheLight) August 13, 2020
You May Also Like
I just finished Eric Adler's The Battle of the Classics, and wanted to say something about Joel Christiansen's review linked below. I am not sure what motivates the review (I speculate a bit below), but it gives a very misleading impression of the book. 1/x
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x
As someone\u2019s who\u2019s read the book, this review strikes me as tremendously unfair. It mostly faults Adler for not writing the book the reviewer wishes he had! https://t.co/pqpt5Ziivj
— Teresa M. Bejan (@tmbejan) January 12, 2021
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x
This is a pretty valiant attempt to defend the "Feminist Glaciology" article, which says conventional wisdom is wrong, and this is a solid piece of scholarship. I'll beg to differ, because I think Jeffery, here, is confusing scholarship with "saying things that seem right".
The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.
Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)
There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.
At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?
Imagine for a moment the most obscurantist, jargon-filled, po-mo article the politically correct academy might produce. Pure SJW nonsense. Got it? Chances are you're imagining something like the infamous "Feminist Glaciology" article from a few years back.https://t.co/NRaWNREBvR pic.twitter.com/qtSFBYY80S
— Jeffrey Sachs (@JeffreyASachs) October 13, 2018
The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.
Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)
There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.
At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?
