Press conference with city/county officials + Austin Energy GM Jackie Sargent.
WATCH:
Sargent: Currently, we not stable enough to have rotating outages. We are seeing some outages due to the ice storm. We are working on all of that at this time.
Sargent: As you look at the load that is served by AE across the community, we have a lot of medical facilities, govt facilities, we have other loads that are critical in nature due to being the capital of Texas.
Sargent: We do realize there are going to be impacts and we're going to be mindful of that - maintain balance of affordability and reliability.
Sargent: The way the system was setup, was to cycle through circuits and look at amount of load instead of individual consumer load. We do have remote disconnect meters, but they're not part of this application because we need to do it in
More from Government
1 of 19) A number of tweets were posted by @LLinWood beginning late last night and into the morning. There are a total of 19. This thread has compiled all.
{“Shots fired across the bow”}
{Warning to traitors}
{Light will reveal the evil plans}
{You were warned traitors}
{“Shots fired across the bow”}
{Warning to traitors}
{Light will reveal the evil plans}
{You were warned traitors}
As background to tweets I am about to post, you should read this article carefully. I ask that you read each of my tweets carefully & decide if the information conveyed demands that Patriots rise up so that every lie will be revealed.@realDonaldTrumphttps://t.co/9KIX4DEtha
— Lin Wood (@LLinWood) January 4, 2021
I don't normally do threads like this but I did want to provide some deeper thoughts on the below and why having a video game based on a real world war crime from the same people that received CIA funding isn't the best idea.
This will go pretty in depth FYI.
The core reason why I'm doing this thread is because:
1. It's clear the developers are marketing the game a certain way.
2. This is based on something that actually happened, a war crime no less. I don't have issues with shooter games in general ofc.
Firstly, It's important to acknowledge that the Iraq war was an illegal war, based on lies, a desire for regime change and control of resources in the region.
These were lies that people believed and still believe to this day.
It's also important to mention that the action taken by these aggressors is the reason there was a battle in Fallujah in the first place. People became resistance fighters because they were left with nothing but death and destruction all around them after the illegal invasion.
This is where one of the first red flags comes up.
The game is very much from an American point of view, as shown in the description.
When it mentions Iraqi civilians, it doesn't talk about them as victims, but mentions them as being pro US, fighting alongside them.
This will go pretty in depth FYI.
I couldn't possibly guess why Six Days in Fallujah is being revived at a time when US army recruitment is at an all time low.
— Daniel Ahmad (@ZhugeEX) February 11, 2021
This reboot is from the same people that worked with the FBI and CIA on training systems and is basing its game on excusing US war crimes. pic.twitter.com/5H8vVqKh9s
The core reason why I'm doing this thread is because:
1. It's clear the developers are marketing the game a certain way.
2. This is based on something that actually happened, a war crime no less. I don't have issues with shooter games in general ofc.
Firstly, It's important to acknowledge that the Iraq war was an illegal war, based on lies, a desire for regime change and control of resources in the region.
These were lies that people believed and still believe to this day.
It's also important to mention that the action taken by these aggressors is the reason there was a battle in Fallujah in the first place. People became resistance fighters because they were left with nothing but death and destruction all around them after the illegal invasion.
This is where one of the first red flags comes up.
The game is very much from an American point of view, as shown in the description.
When it mentions Iraqi civilians, it doesn't talk about them as victims, but mentions them as being pro US, fighting alongside them.
WOW, Mike Gapes and Joan Ryan are non-Labour JLM conference attendees discussing disciplinary processes with Keir Starmer and Angela Rayner but not a privilege afforded to the people who pay the wages of the party machine. #LabourLeaks #StarmerOut #LFI https://t.co/XZDKR5FmXC
So what should Peter Mandelson talk about at the recent Jewish Labour Movement conference – his worries that an independent process will hamper the party leader Keir Starmer?. #LabourLeaks #StarmerOut #LFI
Mandelson “was there in the 1980s and understands where the power bases of the right are, and how it should be exercised”. Who needs independent processes or oversight when you are in the driving seat?. #LabourLeaks #StarmerOut #LFI
Poale Zion trades as Jewish Labour Movement is a part of the Zionist Federation of the UK and organise within the World Zionist Organisation. You do NOT have to be Jewish or a member of the Labour Party to join. JLM contains CIA asset Ruth Smeeth. #LabourLeaks #StarmerOut #BICOM
Ruth Smeeth, one of the 60 plus anti-Corbyn resignations from the shadow cabinet, formerly held a post with the lobby group, Trevor Chinn's Britain Israel Communications and Research Centre (BICOM). #StarmerOut #BICOM #JLM https://t.co/H2a9vnsnRP
So what should Peter Mandelson talk about at the recent Jewish Labour Movement conference – his worries that an independent process will hamper the party leader Keir Starmer?. #LabourLeaks #StarmerOut #LFI
Mandelson “was there in the 1980s and understands where the power bases of the right are, and how it should be exercised”. Who needs independent processes or oversight when you are in the driving seat?. #LabourLeaks #StarmerOut #LFI
Poale Zion trades as Jewish Labour Movement is a part of the Zionist Federation of the UK and organise within the World Zionist Organisation. You do NOT have to be Jewish or a member of the Labour Party to join. JLM contains CIA asset Ruth Smeeth. #LabourLeaks #StarmerOut #BICOM
Ruth Smeeth, one of the 60 plus anti-Corbyn resignations from the shadow cabinet, formerly held a post with the lobby group, Trevor Chinn's Britain Israel Communications and Research Centre (BICOM). #StarmerOut #BICOM #JLM https://t.co/H2a9vnsnRP
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.
