Anna & your followers: go to archive.org & enter Parrot’s old website savethefalcons.org. IMO there are lots of red flags on Parrot’s stability, reliability, motivations. Lots of contradictory info. Make your own judgement but also do due diligence on this source
Please also read this 1990 article that includes info on Parrot (long but worth your time to get a sense of his personality and past behavior): latimes.com/archives/la-xp…
All disinformation campaigns include some truth or near-truths, usually info that has been published before.

The disinfo then publicizes the experts who published that well-sourced info as if they are also legitimating the disinfo falsehoods.

Don’t fall for this old tactic.
See the savethefalcons.org website, archived at archive.org.

If you’re actually trying to infiltrate the highest circles of Arab royalty, you maybe don’t put up a website listing them all as criminals, with claims that you’ve got a global infiltration network.
Alan Parrot examples: See his "Ten Most Wanted" (actually lists 67 entities as it veers off into global accusations):
web.archive.org/web/2004060509…

And his wannabe spy recruitment program:

web.archive.org/web/2004060509…

Make your own judgement but...IMO not a stable or reliable source.
Some earlier critiques of his claims. Again, don't take these at face value any more than you should accept Parrott's claims without skepticism. But also don't dismiss:

stephenbodio.blogspot.com/2010/05/parrot…

5 years earlier, same source: stephenbodio.blogspot.com/2005/11/of-sav…

Also
neveryetmelted.com/2010/05/11/osa…
So @Annakhait , please resolve the conflict between these two tweets: First you say "I am waiting to see it just as much as you are" and then you say "I did verify the documents and audio files. I have seen the documents myself."

Calling your bluff. What did you verify and how?

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Christine Brim

Christine Brim Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @Christine_Brim

15 Apr
Article states that two “gain of function” flu projects (unnamed) were also given waivers, along with the 5 MERS projects - wouldn’t this have been with Fauci’s approval?

“Moratorium on risky experiments lifted for MERS mouse studies | Science | AAAS” sciencemag.org/news/2014/12/m…
Here are the 2014 letters sent out in response to the FOIA. Two of these were flu projects that got waivers and continued research.

At least one letter recipient (UNC) had worked with Wuhan Lab researchers. Perhaps others too?
@diana_west_ @Harvard2H
sciencemag.org/sites/default/…
The moratorium was voluntary according to those letters, & researchers could continue to the end of the budgeted grant period. So were the 2 flu project waivers to allow research AFTER current grant period? See for example, the UNC letter. UNC had worked with Wuhan researchers:
Read 32 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!