NEW SCOOP from @zachsdorfman: China's Ministry of State Security has demanded that private Chinese companies, including Baidu and Alibaba, help them process stolen U.S. data, such as from the OPM hack, U.S. intelligence officials
There has been speculation that Baidu, Alibaba, and Tencent might have ties to China's security state. In fact, they work directly with them and for them—because they have to. According to US intel.
Just yesterday, we saw this from DHS:
https://t.co/d7wrQQlZNV
More from World
-Thread-
The Bolshevik Revolution was Jewish, 6/8 Soviet leaders from Lenin to Gorbachev were Jewish AND all three Presidents since the (fake) fall of the Soviet Union are Jewish
Lenin✡️
Stalin✡️
Khrushchev✡️
Brezhnev✡️
Andropov✡️
Gorbachev✡️
~
Yeltsin✡️
Medvedev✡️
Putin✡️
First Soviet government mostly Jewish:
Funded by International Jewish bankers;
https://t.co/qdmhsmSRFz
Ariadna Tyrkova-Williams on Bolshevik revolution:
“In the Soviet Republic, all the committees and commissaries were filled with Jews”
https://t.co/iysRhViRe3
Lenin:
"Russian-Jewish newspaper Yevreyskaya Tribuna , 22nd August, 1922 - Lenin asked the rabbis if they were satisfied with the particularly cruel executions."
https://t.co/vWoUqvmXc4
Stalin:
B’nai Brith report - Stalin is Jewish (pg 35)
https://t.co/Km9UClfrRt
Stalin's Jewish mother (Jewish Cup Kiddush covered with a shroud - on the grave of Stalin's mother) https://t.co/XXAkeC6wID
Soviet Analyst, Volume 31, Issues 1-7
https://t.co/ycZG4XshNC
Khrushchev:
Nikita Salomon PEARLMUTTER. (img 1) https://t.co/aVLCetMf3w
Another source for Pearlmutter (img2)
https://t.co/m6JzRrD1BJ
"Khrushchev, also, promptly added that the Soviet Government is based today on Jewish leadership"
https://t.co/4lg7XZJON8
The Bolshevik Revolution was Jewish, 6/8 Soviet leaders from Lenin to Gorbachev were Jewish AND all three Presidents since the (fake) fall of the Soviet Union are Jewish
Lenin✡️
Stalin✡️
Khrushchev✡️
Brezhnev✡️
Andropov✡️
Gorbachev✡️
~
Yeltsin✡️
Medvedev✡️
Putin✡️
First Soviet government mostly Jewish:
Funded by International Jewish bankers;
https://t.co/qdmhsmSRFz
Ariadna Tyrkova-Williams on Bolshevik revolution:
“In the Soviet Republic, all the committees and commissaries were filled with Jews”
https://t.co/iysRhViRe3
Lenin:
"Russian-Jewish newspaper Yevreyskaya Tribuna , 22nd August, 1922 - Lenin asked the rabbis if they were satisfied with the particularly cruel executions."
https://t.co/vWoUqvmXc4
Stalin:
B’nai Brith report - Stalin is Jewish (pg 35)
https://t.co/Km9UClfrRt
Stalin's Jewish mother (Jewish Cup Kiddush covered with a shroud - on the grave of Stalin's mother) https://t.co/XXAkeC6wID
Soviet Analyst, Volume 31, Issues 1-7
https://t.co/ycZG4XshNC
Khrushchev:
Nikita Salomon PEARLMUTTER. (img 1) https://t.co/aVLCetMf3w
Another source for Pearlmutter (img2)
https://t.co/m6JzRrD1BJ
"Khrushchev, also, promptly added that the Soviet Government is based today on Jewish leadership"
https://t.co/4lg7XZJON8
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.
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
