and within 12 hours of that conversation, the US Consulate in Frankfurt was raided “by men in US Army uniforms” but Byrne says, “It’s not clear at all who did the seizing. No one’s really taking responsibility, at the moment.” This would explain Sidney Powell’s comments
Continues thread
1/
- DID THE BAD GUYS GET THE SCYTL SERVERS? -
A colleague of Byrne’s informed a friendly congressman about the Frankfurt data transfer. This congressman, unfortunately informed the President about this on an open line
and within 12 hours of that conversation, the US Consulate in Frankfurt was raided “by men in US Army uniforms” but Byrne says, “It’s not clear at all who did the seizing. No one’s really taking responsibility, at the moment.” This would explain Sidney Powell’s comments
during last week’s press conference that she was unsure if the Scytl servers seized in this raid had fallen into the hands of the Bad Guys.
- CHINA ‘ABSOLUTELY’ SWITCHED VOTES -
Byrne says there are three different buckets to understand.
Bucket #1, The technical functionality of these Dominion election systems, “Because they were built by Hugo Chavez in order to make himself El Presidente for Life, they were built with functionality that you would not imagine any legitimate voting system would have.
“They can drag and drop votes to the candidate of their choice. And this isn’t a theory, it’s in their instruction manual…they can allocate votes, they can generate blank ballots, they can do all these admin overrides that really destroy election integrity.
“What’s even worse than that, that you do want to understand, if you want to understand the foreign involvement, here is this – and nobody in the press has picked up on this, yet:
these Dominion servers are widely-infected with a malware called QSnatch. And what QSnatch is is a credential-stealer…75,000 Dominion servers [in the US] are infected with it
“That means if an admin or a poll worker in any precinct logs on to any machine that’s infected, their credentials get zapped & sent out on the Dark Web, where they’re for sale or there’s somebody in Xi’an, China, at the military hacking base has them. So they can login.
“So, it’s bad enough that in Maricopa County, Arizona, there’s some precinct worker, there’s an administrator who has the ability to do a bunch of mischief and slide votes around.
It’s especially bad that some guy who steals his credentials from China can login to Maricopa County and that guy in China can move the votes around. That’s horrendous.
“And there’s absolute Chinese involvement in what’s going on here. I’m gonna stop there but there’s absolutely that kind of Chinese involvement.
- HOW TO PROVE THE CASE -
Within 24 hours of the Election, Byrne’s team had put everything together. “We saw the traffic that night…The traffic going to Frankfurt. So that’s one set of things to understand, things like that hack.
“Let me give you another aspect of that: If you go up to the voting booth, with your ballot all filled-out and you turn it in and they feed it into the machine, if the machine says, ‘Oh, I find this hard to read,’ it gives you a warning sign.
The precinct worker will tell you, ‘Honey, you can fill it out again and stand in line for an hour or you just hit this green button.
Hit the green button and your vote will be adjudicated later,’ meaning humans will look at it and they’ll decide, they’ll choose what you were trying to mark. It’ll be OK, it’ll all go in.
“And 95% of people, if not more are going to hit the green button. What that really does with your vote is that it adds it to a pool and a pool accumulates of these adjudicable votes…but the admin can come by and grab – at the end of the day, there’s 931 of those votes…
he can just drag and drop them to Joe Biden, which is why you might see this sudden spike of 983 Biden votes – or, in some cases, 25,000 or 130,000. That’s the functionality. Now, no legitimate machine would have the functionality but let’s set that aside.
Now, we get to Bucket #2.
“Bucket #2 is the lived experiences of the people who voted and who worked in the precincts, who volunteered. And we have hundreds of affadavits from such people.”
Affadavits regarding “Sharpiegate” are an example of the sworn testimonies of irregularities and/or foul play that Byrne’s team has collected, independent of those collected by Trump’s legal team.
Those ballots that became invalidated in Maricopa County because the Sharpie ink bled through, instead of ending up in an “Adjudication Pool”, as referenced in Bucket #1 above, they ended up in a “Drag ‘n Drop” pool, for Joe Biden.
Bucket #3 refers to the statistical outcomes, in some cases, on the order of “Quadrillions-to-one against that certain things could happen,” Byrne says.
“And again, I am not a Republican, I did not vote for Mr Trump, I’m a Libertarian and I love the Constitution and that’s my religion…I’m not coming at this from a pro-Trump thing, I’m just about the truth.
“If the outcomes that occur – if you were theoretcially in an intensely Biden district, with 96% support, & you had 100 people come in & vote, the chances that 100 people in a row would vote for Biden would be .96 raised to the hundredth power. So that’s 60-1 against.
More from For later read
Excited we finally have a draft of this paper, which attempts to provide a 'unifying theory' of the long economic divergence between the Middle East & Western Europe
As we see it, there are 3 recent theories that hit on important aspects of the divergence...
1/
One set of theories focus on the legitimating power of Islam (Rubin, @prof_ahmetkuru, Platteau). This gave religious clerics greater power, which pulled political resources away form those encouraging economic development
But these theories leave some questions unanswered...
2/
Religious legitimacy is only effective if people
care what religious authorities dictate. Given the economic consequences, why do people remain religious, and thereby render religious legitimacy effective? Is religiosity a cause or a consequence of institutional arrangements?
3/
Another set of theories focus on the religious proscriptions of Islam, particular those associated with Islamic law (@timurkuran). These laws were appropriate for the setting they formed but had unforeseeable consequences and failed to change as economic circumstances changed
4/
There are unaddressed questions here, too
Muslim rulers must have understood that Islamic law carried proscriptions that hampered economic development. Why, then, did they continue to use Islamic institutions (like courts) that promoted inefficiencies?
5/
As we see it, there are 3 recent theories that hit on important aspects of the divergence...
1/
New CEPR Discussion Paper - DP15802
— CEPR (@cepr_org) February 14, 2021
Culture, Institutions & the Long Divergence@albertobisin @nyuniversity, Jared Rubin @jaredcrubin @ChapmanU, Avner Seror @SerorAvner @amseaixmars @univamu, Thierry Verdier @PSEinfohttps://t.co/lhs6AJb7jE#CEPR_DE, #CEPR_EH, #CEPR_ITRE pic.twitter.com/FtMzAELljJ
One set of theories focus on the legitimating power of Islam (Rubin, @prof_ahmetkuru, Platteau). This gave religious clerics greater power, which pulled political resources away form those encouraging economic development
But these theories leave some questions unanswered...
2/
Religious legitimacy is only effective if people
care what religious authorities dictate. Given the economic consequences, why do people remain religious, and thereby render religious legitimacy effective? Is religiosity a cause or a consequence of institutional arrangements?
3/
Another set of theories focus on the religious proscriptions of Islam, particular those associated with Islamic law (@timurkuran). These laws were appropriate for the setting they formed but had unforeseeable consequences and failed to change as economic circumstances changed
4/
There are unaddressed questions here, too
Muslim rulers must have understood that Islamic law carried proscriptions that hampered economic development. Why, then, did they continue to use Islamic institutions (like courts) that promoted inefficiencies?
5/
You May Also Like
Speech Delay is most common in children nowadays
In ancient times, our grandparents used to follow typical natural way of caring the needs of a child. All they used were more of natural products than chemical based for the growth of child.
One of major step followed was to feed Gurbach Jadd/ Vasa Kommu/ Acorus Calamus for initiating good speech ability in a child. This stem was needed to babies on Tuesdays and Sundays in mother's milk.
Vasa is feed to baby after the 1st bath on 12th day in week. Weekly only thrice it is fed and named as :
Budhwar - Budhi Vasa
Mangalwar - Vaak Vasa
Ravi Vaar - Aayush Vasa
This stem is burnt and rubbed against the grinding stone in mother's milk or warm water to get a paste
The procedure to make it is in the link
https://t.co/uo4sGp7mUm
It should not be given daily to the child. Other main benefits are
1. It clears the phlegm in child's throat caused due to continuous milk intake. It clears the tracts and breathing is effortless.
2. Digestion
For children who haven't got their speech and is delayed than usual should feed this vasa on these days in week atleast for 6months. Don't get carried away with this dialogue
"Some gain speech little late"
In ancient times, our grandparents used to follow typical natural way of caring the needs of a child. All they used were more of natural products than chemical based for the growth of child.
One of major step followed was to feed Gurbach Jadd/ Vasa Kommu/ Acorus Calamus for initiating good speech ability in a child. This stem was needed to babies on Tuesdays and Sundays in mother's milk.
Vasa is feed to baby after the 1st bath on 12th day in week. Weekly only thrice it is fed and named as :
Budhwar - Budhi Vasa
Mangalwar - Vaak Vasa
Ravi Vaar - Aayush Vasa
This stem is burnt and rubbed against the grinding stone in mother's milk or warm water to get a paste
The procedure to make it is in the link
https://t.co/uo4sGp7mUm
It should not be given daily to the child. Other main benefits are
1. It clears the phlegm in child's throat caused due to continuous milk intake. It clears the tracts and breathing is effortless.
2. Digestion
For children who haven't got their speech and is delayed than usual should feed this vasa on these days in week atleast for 6months. Don't get carried away with this dialogue
"Some gain speech little late"
This is a pretty valiant attempt to defend the "Feminist Glaciology" article, which says conventional wisdom is wrong, and this is a solid piece of scholarship. I'll beg to differ, because I think Jeffery, here, is confusing scholarship with "saying things that seem right".
The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.
Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)
There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.
At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?
Imagine for a moment the most obscurantist, jargon-filled, po-mo article the politically correct academy might produce. Pure SJW nonsense. Got it? Chances are you're imagining something like the infamous "Feminist Glaciology" article from a few years back.https://t.co/NRaWNREBvR pic.twitter.com/qtSFBYY80S
— Jeffrey Sachs (@JeffreyASachs) October 13, 2018
The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.
Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)
There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.
At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?
