THE EVOLUTION OF OUR NATIONAL FLAG (1857-1947)
The INDIAN NATIONAL FLAG is not just a flag! It's a testimony of patriotism and seamless sacrifice. A symbol representing one of the oldest civilizations on this planet.
Let's hope what happened yesterday never repeats!
(Thread)
More from Pegasus of Dharma
More from World
@Ayjchan @K_G_Andersen @stgoldst @RozSofia @Ayjchan @K_G_Andersen please note that there were 11 infections in the Beijing 2004 leaks, not 8.
The 8 you are mentioning are for the main chain of infection with 3 levels from one primary case in April.
But there were 3 more primary cases for a total of 11 cases.
@K_G_Andersen @stgoldst @RozSofia All were linked to the heavily contaminated CDC P3 lab (the top P3 in China at the time).
The cases are typically separated between:
- The February ones (Cui and Ren) which seem to have been covered up by the CDC Institute of Virology. Also we only have pseudonyms for these 2.
@K_G_Andersen @stgoldst @RozSofia - The April ones-9 infections (1+8, officially the 'Beijing-Anhui Apr-2004 breakout'.
The official Chinese report only focussed on the April infections - keeping very quiet about the February ones. Here is the main April chain of infection.
Here is are the 9 from Apr 2004:
@K_G_Andersen @stgoldst @RozSofia And here are the 9 people infected in Apr 2004:
(4-22 in the title -> April chain with alarm raised on the 22nd):
@K_G_Andersen @stgoldst @RozSofia The WHO eventually correctly mentioned 11 cases:
https://t.co/a1HvuT0C8z
The 8 you are mentioning are for the main chain of infection with 3 levels from one primary case in April.
But there were 3 more primary cases for a total of 11 cases.
@K_G_Andersen @stgoldst @RozSofia All were linked to the heavily contaminated CDC P3 lab (the top P3 in China at the time).
The cases are typically separated between:
- The February ones (Cui and Ren) which seem to have been covered up by the CDC Institute of Virology. Also we only have pseudonyms for these 2.
@K_G_Andersen @stgoldst @RozSofia - The April ones-9 infections (1+8, officially the 'Beijing-Anhui Apr-2004 breakout'.
The official Chinese report only focussed on the April infections - keeping very quiet about the February ones. Here is the main April chain of infection.
Here is are the 9 from Apr 2004:
@K_G_Andersen @stgoldst @RozSofia And here are the 9 people infected in Apr 2004:
(4-22 in the title -> April chain with alarm raised on the 22nd):
@K_G_Andersen @stgoldst @RozSofia The WHO eventually correctly mentioned 11 cases:
https://t.co/a1HvuT0C8z
MISREPRESENTED CONTEXT
1. I am indeed disgusted with attempts to misrepresent and take out of context what I wrote on my blog yesterday.
2. Those who did that highlighted only one part of paragraph 12 which read: “Muslims have a right to be angry and to kill millions of French people for the massacres of the past.”
3. They stopped there and implied that I am promoting the massacre of the French.
4.If they had read d posting in its entirety & especially the subsequent sentence which read: “But by & large the Muslims hv not applied the “eye for an eye” law. Muslims don’t. The French shouldn’t. Instead the French should teach their people to respect other people’s feelings
5. Because of the spin and out of context presentation by those that picked up my posting, reports were made against me and I am accused of promoting violence etc… on Facebook and Twitter.
1. I am indeed disgusted with attempts to misrepresent and take out of context what I wrote on my blog yesterday.
RESPECT OTHERS
— Dr Mahathir Mohamad (@chedetofficial) October 29, 2020
1. A teacher in France had his throat slit by an 18-year-old Chechen boy. The killer was angered by the teacher showing a caricature of Prophet Muhammad. The teacher intended to demonstrate freedom of expression.
2. Those who did that highlighted only one part of paragraph 12 which read: “Muslims have a right to be angry and to kill millions of French people for the massacres of the past.”
3. They stopped there and implied that I am promoting the massacre of the French.
4.If they had read d posting in its entirety & especially the subsequent sentence which read: “But by & large the Muslims hv not applied the “eye for an eye” law. Muslims don’t. The French shouldn’t. Instead the French should teach their people to respect other people’s feelings
5. Because of the spin and out of context presentation by those that picked up my posting, reports were made against me and I am accused of promoting violence etc… on Facebook and Twitter.
"MLs" do support the proletariat of Xinjiang & have the whole time. People like @Tursunali_7 & @GulnarNorthwest (and many others) who show the world the real Xinjiang via their everyday videos.
Shopkeepers like in this video below say
"Pompeo, we Xinjiang people hate you."
Or everyday working people like Zaynura Namatqari, who speak out against vicious & disgusting US lies and accusations about
.@qiaocollective have a brilliant thread of everyday proletarian Uyghurs speaking out against the harassment they face from the US and their paid
'Uyghur proletariat' looks like this:
Not like this: (photo from a pro Islamist separatist protest in Turkey in 2017)
Shopkeepers like in this video below say
"Pompeo, we Xinjiang people hate you."
Or everyday working people like Zaynura Namatqari, who speak out against vicious & disgusting US lies and accusations about
BBC's false reporting is hurting real Uygurs.
— Jingjing Li \u674e\u83c1\u83c1 (@Jingjing_Li) February 13, 2021
At a press conference, I saw this Uygur lady, who is a former trainee of a vocational education & training center in #Xinjiang, got emotional & furious at @BBC 's false reporting accusing systematic rape in #China. #Uyghur pic.twitter.com/vdu7KlAWMr
.@qiaocollective have a brilliant thread of everyday proletarian Uyghurs speaking out against the harassment they face from the US and their paid
The family of a retired cadre scorn Pompeo and the American imperialist interests he stands for. They celebrate China's sanctioning of Pompeo as the proper move against U.S. imperialist designs on Xinjiang. pic.twitter.com/vOfExwMfD8
— Qiao Collective (@qiaocollective) February 12, 2021
'Uyghur proletariat' looks like this:
Not like this: (photo from a pro Islamist separatist protest in Turkey in 2017)
You May Also Like
1/“What would need to be true for you to….X”
Why is this the most powerful question you can ask when attempting to reach an agreement with another human being or organization?
A thread, co-written by @deanmbrody:
2/ First, “X” could be lots of things. Examples: What would need to be true for you to
- “Feel it's in our best interest for me to be CMO"
- “Feel that we’re in a good place as a company”
- “Feel that we’re on the same page”
- “Feel that we both got what we wanted from this deal
3/ Normally, we aren’t that direct. Example from startup/VC land:
Founders leave VC meetings thinking that every VC will invest, but they rarely do.
Worse over, the founders don’t know what they need to do in order to be fundable.
4/ So why should you ask the magic Q?
To get clarity.
You want to know where you stand, and what it takes to get what you want in a way that also gets them what they want.
It also holds them (mentally) accountable once the thing they need becomes true.
5/ Staying in the context of soliciting investors, the question is “what would need to be true for you to want to invest (or partner with us on this journey, etc)?”
Multiple responses to this question are likely to deliver a positive result.
Why is this the most powerful question you can ask when attempting to reach an agreement with another human being or organization?
A thread, co-written by @deanmbrody:
Next level tactic when closing a sale, candidate, or investment:
— Erik Torenberg (@eriktorenberg) February 27, 2018
Ask: \u201cWhat needs to be true for you to be all in?\u201d
You'll usually get an explicit answer that you might not get otherwise. It also holds them accountable once the thing they need becomes true.
2/ First, “X” could be lots of things. Examples: What would need to be true for you to
- “Feel it's in our best interest for me to be CMO"
- “Feel that we’re in a good place as a company”
- “Feel that we’re on the same page”
- “Feel that we both got what we wanted from this deal
3/ Normally, we aren’t that direct. Example from startup/VC land:
Founders leave VC meetings thinking that every VC will invest, but they rarely do.
Worse over, the founders don’t know what they need to do in order to be fundable.
4/ So why should you ask the magic Q?
To get clarity.
You want to know where you stand, and what it takes to get what you want in a way that also gets them what they want.
It also holds them (mentally) accountable once the thing they need becomes true.
5/ Staying in the context of soliciting investors, the question is “what would need to be true for you to want to invest (or partner with us on this journey, etc)?”
Multiple responses to this question are likely to deliver a positive result.
