Jump to content

Did COMPUTER MODELLING Cause The CHAOS Of The Last 20 Years?


Recommended Posts

This is how someone explained Occult numbers to me:

 

666 - The Antichrist

777 - The Messiah

888 - The Antichrist After Defeating The Messiah

999 - God

 

9/11 is symbolic of:

 

- 9 x II = 18 = 6+ 6+ 6 = "Two NINES or 999s Being Knocked Down"

 

This means: "God knocked down ONCE during the Crucifiction of Christ" AND "God's World Order knocked down a SECOND TIME in the 21st Century, which is Century 7+ 7 + 7"

 

- Building 7 Demolition: "Ritual Demolition Of The 777 Representing The Messiah"

 

 

Anyone have any thoughts on this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 11, September 11, is supposed to be Christs real Birth date, according to some interpretations of Revelation.

 

Biblical scholars know 25th December was not Christs birthday, some say August, some say 11 September and other dates have been suggested.

 

So the attack on that date is supposed to have been symbolically an attack on Jesus.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, pi3141 said:

9 11, September 11, is supposed to be Christs real Birth date, according to some interpretations of Revelation.

 

Biblical scholars know 25th December was not Christs birthday, some say August, some say 11 September and other dates have been suggested.

 

So the attack on that date is supposed to have been symbolically an attack on Jesus.

 

Judging by th3 OCCULT SYMBOLISM SHIT on display in the years since, yes it was probably intended to be a symbolic demolition of Jesus and the Divine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We are supposed to listen to Schwab, Harrari and similar ranting day in and day out and "be really scared for the future".

 

But surely Schwab and company are not the REAL decisionmakers at the WEF, and just frontmen.

 

So WHO are the real powerbrokers behind the WEF and Schwab?

 

Who is REALLY CALLING THE SHOTS?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tedros is riding high again...

 

COVID-22-POX? PUSTULITIS-22? PFIZERITIS? VAXYOUPOX-22? 🤣

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-06-13/who-weighs-renaming-monkeypox-virus-to-minimize-stigma-racism

 

 

The World Health Organization will officially rename monkeypox, in light of concerns about stigma and racism surrounding the virus that has infected over 1,600 people in more than two dozen countries.

 

Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, the WHO’s director general, announced Tuesday morning that the organization is “working with partners and experts from around the world on changing the name of monkeypox virus, its clades and the disease it causes.” He said the WHO will make announcements about the new names as soon as possible. 

 

More than 30 international scientists said last week that the monkeypox label is discriminatory and stigmatizing, and there’s an “urgent” need to rename it. The current name doesn’t fit with WHO guidelines that recommend avoiding geographic regions and animal names, a spokesperson said.

 

The proposal echoes a similar controversy that erupted when the WHO moved quickly to rename SARS-CoV-2 after people around the world referred to it as the China or Wuhan virus in the absence of an official designation. The actual animal source of monkeypox, which has been found in a wide variety of mammals, remains unknown.

 

“In the context of the current global outbreak, continued reference to, and nomenclature of this virus being African is not only inaccurate but is also discriminatory and stigmatizing,” the scientists’ group said in a letter online.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been seeing this "Golden Billion" theory mentioned more and more online:

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_billion

 

 

The golden billion (Russian: золотой миллиард, tr. zolotoy milliard) is the theory that indefinite elites pull strings to amass wealth and destroy regular people’s lives.[1] It is popular in the Russian-speaking world.[2]

 

 

According to Sergey Kara-Murza, the golden billion consumes the lion's share of all resources on the planet. If at least half of the global population begins to consume resources to the same extent, these resources wouldn't be sufficient.[3] This is partly based on the ideas of Thomas Malthus, in that emphasis is placed on the scarcity of natural resources. However, whereas Malthus was mostly concerned with finite global crop yields, anti-globalists that advocate the idea of a "golden billion" are mostly concerned with finite natural resources such as fossil fuels and metal. According to Kara-Murza, the developed countries, while preserving for their nationals a high level of consumption, endorse political, military and economic measures designed to keep the rest of the world in an industrially undeveloped state and as a raw-material appendage area for the dumping of hazardous waste and as a source of cheap labor.[4]

 

The theory, which holds that the wealth of the West, including that of the lower classes, is mostly based on exploitation of the former colonies in the third world, is not new in Russia, where it was first popularized by Vladimir Lenin, in Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism. Lenin described the relationship between capitalism and imperialism, wherein the merging of banks and industrial cartels produces finance capital. The final, imperialist stage of capitalism, originates in the financial function of generating greater profits than the home market can yield; thus, business exports (excess) capital, which, in due course, leads to the economic division of the world among international business monopolies, and imperial European states colonising large portions of the world to generate investment profits.

 

Whereas Lenin and other Marxist anti-imperialists such as Immanuel Wallerstein called for an end to the domination of developed nations through international communism, Kara-Murza and his contemporaries in Russia believe that a restriction of free trade (especially with the West), and various methods of state intervention in the economy is the best solution. This economic rationale for protectionism dates back to the early United States and is known as the infant industry argument. The crux of the argument is that nascent industries often do not have the economies of scale that their older competitors from other countries may have, and thus need to be protected until they can attain similar economies of scale. The argument was first explicated by Alexander Hamilton in his 1790 Report on Manufactures, was systematically developed by Daniel Raymond, and was later picked up by Friedrich List in his 1841 work The National System of Political Economy, following his exposure to the idea during his residence in the United States in the 1820s.

 

The differences in incomes in first-world countries and third-world countries cannot be explained by differences in individual productivity. For example, the Caterpillar (CAT) factory in Tosno, Russia has the highest productivity of all CAT factories in Europe, but the workers are paid about an order of magnitude less. The difference is even more startling when comparing the wages of textile workers in United States factories and in China sweatshops. This means that the multinational corporations appropriate a disproportionally high share of the surplus value in "developing" countries. The argument usually holds that the continuation of this exploitation retards the development and prosperity of the developing nations. Hence, globalization and modern capitalism benefit mostly the golden billion, while people in the so-called "developing" countries are getting the short end of the stick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Truthblast.

 

I've picked a few quotes. For perspective 'you' would have to listen to the whole, it's only 2 mins 10 secs. As there are questions and answers it's probably more of an interview than a leak? But either way; 😊 ...

 

M: "In order for people to have trust in Twitter, I think it's extremely important that there'd be transparency".

 

Q  "Can we talk briefly about your political views?" 

 

M: "I'm in favour of moderate politics. But allowing people who have relatively extreme views to express those views within the bounds of the law". 

 

M: "The standard is much more than not offending people. The standard should be that they (twitter users) are entertained and informed".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Home  News

SpaceX Said to Fire Employees Involved in Letter Rebuking Elon Musk

SpaceX Said to Fire Employees Involved in Letter Rebuking Elon Musk
9.8k
SHARES
 
 

SpaceX, the private rocket company, on Thursday fired employees who helped write and distribute an open letter criticizing the behavior of chief executive Elon Musk, said three employees with knowledge of the situation.

Some SpaceX employees began circulating the letter, which denounced Mr. Musk’s activity on Twitter, on Wednesday. The letter called the billionaire’s public behavior and tweeting “a frequent source of distraction and embarrassment” and asked the company to rein him in. Mr. Musk is currently closing a $44 billion deal to buy Twitter.

 

 

By Thursday afternoon, SpaceX had fired some of the letter’s organizers, according to the three employees and an email from Gwynne Shotwell, SpaceX’s president and chief operating officer. In her email, which was obtained by The New York Times, she said the company had investigated and “terminated a number of employees involved” with the letter.

 

“The letter, solicitations and general process made employees feel uncomfortable, intimidated and bullied, and/or angry because the letter pressured them to sign onto something that did not reflect their views,” Ms. Shotwell wrote. “We have too much critical work to accomplish and no need for this kind of overreaching activism.”

It was unclear how many employees were fired. James Gleeson, a SpaceX spokesman, did not immediately return a request for comment.

 

The open letter followed recently publicized accusations of sexual misconduct against Mr. Musk amid his contentious acquisition of Twitter. On Thursday, Mr. Musk addressed Twitter employees for the first time since his takeover offer via a video call to answer their questions.

 

In May, Insider reported that a flight attendant said Mr. Musk propositioned her for a sexual massage during a flight to London in 2016. The flight attendant said he also exposed himself to her and offered her a horse, according to the article, the details of which were not independently verified by The Times.

 

 

Mr. Musk called the accusations “utterly untrue” and joked about horses and his genitalia on Twitter. Last month, Ms. Shotwell said in an email to SpaceX employees that she “personally” believed the sexual harassment allegations against Mr. Musk were false.

 

Mr. Musk, who has previously been sued by a government regulator and private individuals for his tweets, founded SpaceX in 2002. Ms. Shotwell joined that same year. Mr. Musk is also chief executive of Tesla, the electric automaker.

 

At SpaceX, Mr. Musk is rarely challenged by his own workers, said the three employees, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. Earlier this month, he notified the company’s workers via email that they must spend at least 40 hours in the office or face firing.

 

The open letter about Mr. Musk’s online activity asked that SpaceX’s leaders “publicly address and condemn Elon’s harmful Twitter behavior” and “define and uniformly respond to all forms of unacceptable behavior.”

In her email to staff, Ms. Shotwell wrote, “Blanketing thousands of people across the company with repeated unsolicited emails and asking them to sign letters and fill out unsponsored surveys during the work day is not acceptable.”

 

“Please stay focused on the SpaceX mission, and use your time to do your best work,” she continued. “This is how we will get to Mars.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Billionares obsessed with destroying male-female genders:

 

https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/billionaire-family-pushing-synthetic-sex-identities-ssi-pritzkers

 

 

The Pritzkers became the first American family to have a medical school bear its name in recognition of a private donation when it gave $12 million to the University of Chicago School of Medicine in 1968. In June 2002, the family announced an additional gift of $30 million to be invested in the University of Chicago’s Biological Sciences Division and School of Medicine. These investments provided the family with a bridgehead into the world of academic medicine, which it has since expanded in pursuit of a well-defined agenda centered around SSI. Also in 2002, Jennifer Pritzker founded the Tawani Foundation, which has since provided funding to Howard Brown Health and Rush Memorial Medical Center in Chicago, the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences Foundation Fund, and the University of Minnesota’s Institute for Sexual and Gender Health, all of which provide some version of “gender care.” In the case of the latter, “clients” include “gender creative children as well as transgender and gender non-conforming adolescents ...”

 

 

Ever since, a motivating and driving force behind the Pritzkers’ familywide commitment to SSI has been J.B.’s cousin Jennifer (born James) Pritzker—a retired lieutenant colonel in the Illinois Army National Guard and the father of three children. In 2013, around the time gender ideology reached the level of mainstream American culture, Jennifer Pritzker announced a transition to womanhood. Since then, Pritzker has used the Tawani Foundation to help fund various institutions that support the concept of a spectrum of human sexes, including the Human Rights Campaign Foundation, the Williams Institute UCLA School of Law, the National Center for Transgender Equality, the Transgender Legal Defense and Education Fund, the American Civil Liberties Union, the Palm Military Center, the World Professional Association of Transgender Health (WPATH), and many others. Tawani Enterprises, the private investment counterpart to the philanthropic foundation, invests in and partners with Squadron Capital LLC, a Chicago-based private investment vehicle that acquires a number of medical device companies that manufacture instruments, implants, cutting tools, and injection molded plastic products for use in surgeries. As in the case of Jon Stryker, founder of the LGBT mega-NGO Arcus Foundation, it is hard to avoid the impression of complementarity between Jennifer Pritzker’s for-profit medical investments and philanthropic support for SSI.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

🤣🤣🤣   BWAHAHAHA!

 

The Flight Officer wants to stay anonymous, but they show the full outline of her face, her haircut, what Carrier Group she was flying for and don't disguise her voice.

 

"IT WAS 40 FEET LONG, SHAPED LIKE A GIANT TICTAC AND HAD NO WINGS"

 

😆😆😆

 

HAAAAAA HAAAAAA HAAAAAA

 

 

Edited by Truthblast
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Truthblast changed the title to This Is Sooooo FUNNY To Watch - HISTORY CHANNEL Desperately Trying To Push The "U.S. Aircraft Carriers Vs TicTac UFOs" Story

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...