Something very odd is going on with this tweet. The first time I posted, it vanished without a trace. The second time it was visible to me, but there was a long delay for others. Hard to escape the sense that Twitter likes the duopoly much more than democracy. #Unity2020
And now it shows up twice
And for some reason the source tweet is "unavailable"
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Please look into the case of Robert Robertson. I’ll provide links in the replies. But please don’t wait. He is scheduled to die TONIGHT (Thurs. Oct. 17th) in Texas. It is a CLEAR miscarriage of justice, with Pharma corruption as a central element of the story of how he was falsely convicted. We can stop this IF WE ACT NOW.
The Texas State Legislature has subpoenaed Robertson to testify on Monday. That subpoena does not alone have the power to halt the execution, but sufficient public pressure can save him. THIS IS IN OUR POWER.
We have only HOURS.
Please retweet
A deep dive on Robert Robertson’s case and Shaken Baby Syndrome.
The Prime Minister of Slovakia, Robert Fico, had been shot. This comes days after Slovakia’s courageous rejection of the WHO’s audacious Pandemic Preparedness Treaty and International Health Regulations.
We can’t be certain if these events are connected. But whoever is steering the WHO clearly views national sovereignty as an irritant, and human lives as disposable.
Elon uses X to shape the world. His tweets matter. When Musk blocks you, you can’t see important information readily available to others, not even when quoted by a friend. This amounts to a brave new kind of censorship, targeted at particular members of the audience.
@elonmusk
I’m not saying this is Musk’s intent. It seems likely to me that he doesn’t even realize how different X looks after his block.
I‘m not saying blocks have no place. I block accounts that look like bots or sock puppets. I also block those those who harass or attempt to distort conversation in the replies. I bend over backwards not to block critics who don’t cross those (unfortunately subjective) lines.
I sat next to a nurse (older) on a flight. I asked her about her experience during the Covid crisis. She said that “anti-vaxxers” had made things tough. Then she stopped herself and said “of course don’t know if you might be an anti-vaxxer”
I said “I wasn’t one, but the Covid vaccine nonsense woke me up”. I told her I knew a lot of injured people from the Covid jabs, and I couldn’t believe these highly novel, barely tested shots were being given to healthy, young people who stood to gain nothing from them, and that I was shocked that they were still being recommended.
She nodded in agreement and said the mRNA vaccines had been particularly bad, indicating she was aware of many people injured and killed by them.
Later in the conversation she told me that her husband had recently died of pancreatic cancer. And her son had been diagnosed with aggressive, metastatic colon cancer.
She did not appear to see a connection between the shots and the cancers. The timing of these tumors could of course, be mere coincidences, but I would have thought the question of a possible connection would be obvious. And given the frank medical nature of our conversation, I believe she would have mentioned a suspicion if she’d had one.
I find the whole encounter disorienting, suggesting a fragmented belief structure that I believe must be common amongst those getting their news from corrupted sources—the smoldering ruins of a collapsed mass formation event.
#NeverAgain
P.S. this is accurate to the best of my recollection, but I’m sure it’s not perfect.
P.P.S. She did not know who I was, and when I gave her a general idea of what I did for a living, and what I now do, there was no indication that she was aware.
Bad news. I was right, again. In this case about George Floyd and Derek Chauvin, but what should be bugging you is the question of how it’s possible to beat the experts and the public consensus so regularly.
Hint: there’s a method. Many claim to use it. Most are faking.
The method that allows a person to beat the experts is called: First Principles Thinking. The entire intellectual class swears they’re doing it. Most probably believe they are—but aren’t. The sign that someone is practicing the art is predictive power.
In case you’re wondering, yes, I’m getting tired of being told that I used to make sense but this time I have it wrong, wrong, wrong. Unless you have a string of predictions better than mine, you might want to ask yourself where your certainty is coming from. Likely it’s social.
The Israel Attacks: Beyond the Obvious with @efenigson
The line between good and evil is, in this case, crystal clear--and it applies to us all. Barbarism is evil, especially carried out against civilians, immeasurably more so against children. Further, notions of collective guilt and punishment are incompatible with moral decency.
Celebrations of calculated barbarism across the world on the one hand, and hemming and hawing by elites who don't wish acknowledge their rejection of them on the other, are the clearest indication I have yet witnessed that we are in motion toward a historic, global catastrophe.