https://twitter.com/iluminatibot/status/1685602242454298624illuminatibot
@iluminatibot
The next generation is already lost…
Nicole Schwab (WEF) -"things shift rapidily when immediate emergency to livelihood is felt"
Nicole Schwab, daughter to Klaus, member of the Executive Committee” of the WEF who is also the co-director of Platform to Accelerate Nature-Based Solutions & 1t.org.
This is a 2020 WEF discussion called The Urgency of a Green Transition
https://rumble.com/v32qao8-daughter-of-klaus-schwab-admits-covid-tyranny-was-a-precursor-to-coming-cli.html
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12354609/Trucking-giant-Yellow-shuts-99-year-old-company-30-000-staff-12-000-big-rigs-ceases-operations-immediately.html
Trucking giant Yellow shuts down: The 99-year-old company which has almost 30,000 staff and 12,000 big-rigs ceases operations immediately - despite $700M COVID bailout
Trucking giant Yellow collapsed on Sunday, ceasing operations immediately and leaving some 30,000 workers without jobs.
The closure is the biggest in terms of jobs and revenue in the U.S. trucking industry, according to The Wall Street Journal - which first reported its shutdown.
The company, which received $700 million in federal COVID relief funds in 2020, is preparing to file for bankruptcy and is in talks to sell off all or parts of the business.
The nearly 100-year-old firm is known for its competitive pricing and has more than 12,000 trucks shipping freight across the US for brands including Walmart and Home Depot.
But in recent years it has struggled under the weight of debt and had a highly contentious relationship with the Teamsters union: on Sunday, each side blamed the other.
Hundreds of non-union Yellow employees were laid off Friday from the Nashville, Tennessee, company, and about 22,000 Teamster members were told their jobs hung in the balance.
On Sunday morning, the company sent out notices to customers and employees saying it was ceasing all operations at midday.
Stan Koniszewski, a union leader for Teamsters Local 294, said Sunday was 'a sad day in the freight industry' and promised to help members file unemployment claims and look for new jobs
p1
Since 2021, the struggling brand has implemented a cost-cutting plan that executives hoped would put the business back on track.
The company's circumstances have become all the more dire as shipping demand across the freight sector declined substantially this year.
Last week, Yellow, which had $5.2 billion in revenue last year, narrowly avoided a driver strike by Teamster union members after failing to make a $50 million payment for employee benefits. The company had a 30-day period to catch up on pension and benefits payments.
The Teamsters blamed the executives for poor management.
'Teamsters have kept this company afloat for more than a decade through billions of dollars in wage, pension and work-rule concessions,' a union spokesman said.
'Yellow couldn't manage itself, and it wasn't up to Teamsters to do it for them.'
Stan Koniszewski, a union leader for Teamsters Local 294, said it was 'a sad day in the freight industry.'
He said the union 'will be there with whatever support we can give', helping them file unemployment claims and trying to find them new jobs.
'Whatever we do, we will do together as a family - a strong 294 family,' he said.
In a memo sent out on Friday, Teamsters told local unions that 'likelihood that Yellow will survive is increasingly bleak.'
They urged employees to gather their personal things and prepare for the worst.
In Friday's memo to staff, Yellow wrote: 'The company is shutting down its regular operations on July 28, 2023, closing and/or laying off employees at all of its locations, including yours.'
On Sunday, Yellow blamed the union for its intransience.
A spokeswoman for Yellow said it had not asked the union for concessions in its recent restructuring.
'Yellow offered to pay its employees more,' she said. The union 'refused to negotiate for nine months.'
Last week, a company official told the New York Times that the company was preparing for 'a range of contingencies.' By Friday, a company spokesperson would not tell the Times anything more.
Yellow is saddled with some $1.5 billion in debt as of late March, including $729.2 million owed to the federal government for a controversial pandemic-era loan the Treasury Department extended on national security grounds in 2020.
A June 2023 congressional report concluded the Treasury Department dodged its own policies to issue the loan and the previous administration had made a mistake in doing so.
In May, Yellow reported a loss of $54.6 million, a decline of $1.06 per share, for its first quarter of 2023. Operating revenue was about $1.16 billion in the period.
An investors note from financial service firm Stephens last week estimated that Yellow could be burning between $9 million and $10 million each day.
Yellow was saddled with some $1.5 billion in debt as of late March, including $729.2 million owed to the federal government for a controversial pandemic-era loan the Treasury Department extended on national security grounds in 2020
Using a liquidity disclosure from earlier this month, Yellow had roughly $100 million in cash at the end of June, the note added - estimating that the company has been burning through increasing amounts of money through July.
'It is reasonable to believe that the company could breach its $35 mil. liquidity requirement at any moment,' Stephens analyst Jack Atkins and associate Grant Smith wrote.
The reports of bankruptcy preparations arrive just days after a strike from the Teamsters, which represents Yellow's 22,000 unionized workers, was averted.
A series of heated exchanges have built up between the Teamsters and Yellow, who sued the union in June after alleging it was 'unjustifiably blocking' restructuring plans needed for the company's survival.
The Teamsters called the litigation 'baseless' - with general president Sean O'Brien pointing to Yellow's 'decades of gross mismanagement,' which included exhausting the $700 million federal loan.
On July 23, a pension fund agreed to extend health benefits for workers at two Yellow Corp. operating companies, averting a strike - and giving Yellow '30 days to pay its bills,' notably $50 million that Yellow failed to pay the Central States Health and Welfare Fund on July 15, the union stated.
While the strike didn't occur, talks of a walkout may have caused some Yellow customers to pull back, Chan said.
If Yellow files for bankruptcy and customers continue to take their shipments to other carriers, like FedEx or ABF Freight, prices will go up.
2 of 2
our budget is zero. we are a non-local, non-hierarchical, specialized collective, on station 24/7 with worldwide OSINT, and we are better because we are volunteer, willing servants of TRUTH aka GOD.
https://twitter.com/SaiKate108/status/1685507408360333312
Kat A 🌸
@SaiKate108
The Thai Medical Authorising Agency will face trial for having authorised the vaccine.
Dr Sucharit Bhakdi says the doctors and Thai elite realise they have been tricked and fooled and a complaint has been lodged.
Slowly but surely the tide is turning as trials will now take place in Japan/Australia and Florida moves to make these vaccines illegal.
https://rumble.com/v32rdqo-live-with-dr.-sucharit-bhakdi.html
https://twitter.com/DrEliDavid/status/1685298860820770817
Dr. Eli David
@DrEliDavid
Pfizer's study of myocarditis for those who received its Covid booster is now officially under the status "delayed" in FDA website 👇
The study was supposed to complete by the end of 2022. What have they found in the study that they're hiding? 🧐
We all know the answer…
https://twitter.com/TracyBethHoeg/status/1685701567977033728
Tracy Høeg, MD, PhD
@TracyBethHoeg
Unreal to check my email about what's trending in
@NEJM
& see our article is #1 most viewed🤯.
I mean, I agree, the boosted having a 20x lower non covid mortality rate than the non-boosted not being disclosed in such an influential study of the 1st booster published in NEJM (https://nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2115624) is a huge deal. Such a big deal I had to do the calculation over and over and over. I knew there was bias, but, wow, 94.8% lower non covid mortality among the boosted!? (As skeptical and cynical as I am, I did not see a difference that big coming)
Are people now waking up to how misleading observational vaccine data can be? Clearly the authors knew about the bias in the data at least since they wrote the response where they disclosed the non-covid mortality numbers in March of 2022. I have trouble believing they did not know about it at the time of the initial publication in December of 2021.
The authors of the original study disclosed no ties to Pfizer but from what I can tell Clalit Health Services is comprised of over half of the Israeli population and the Israeli Ministry of Health had the following agreement about evidence collaboration with Pfizer starting Jan 2021- where Pfizer would be involved in preparing and publishing all results (!). Does anyone know exactly which published studies this applied to? https://ghiaa.org/provision_document/israel-pfizer-real-world-epidemiological-evidence-collaboration-agreement-6/
At any rate, the study published in NEJM we can now see was biased to such an extent, at least I do not think it should have been published. Without a doubt, what is currently written in the article (about a 90% lower covid mortality rate among the boosted is very misleading…. as that was EXPECTED given the underlying differences in health!). We will be writing more on this topic as all of us in medicine should be aware of the potential for these biases.
Very excited this letter
@VPrasadMDMPH
, Ram Duriseti and I wrote has been able to generate so much attention. Have a great Sunday, friends!
Link to our letter : https://nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2306683
Covid cover-up: Wuhan lab leak suspicions, Anthony Fauci and how the science was silenced
https://www.theaustralian.com.au/weekend-australian-magazine/covid-coverup-wuhan-lab-leak-suspicions-anthony-fauci-and-how-the-science-was-silenced/news-story/3e2669c7983b6a66a2bcc535c1e4c6be
America’s top infectious diseases adviser, Anthony Fauci, deliberately decided to downplay suspicions from scientists that Covid-19 came from a laboratory to protect his reputation and deflect from the risky coronavirus research his agency had funded, according to his boss, one of the most senior US health officials during the pandemic.
In an exclusive interview, Robert Kadlec – former assistant secretary for preparedness and response at the US Department of Health – told The Weekend Australian that he, Dr Fauci and National Institutes of Health director Francis Collins privately discussed how to “turn down the temperature” on accusations against China in the early days of the pandemic while they were trying to encourage Beijing to co-operate and share a sample of the virus.
But the senior US health official – who worked for George W. Bush and Donald Trump and went on to lead American efforts to develop a Covid-19 vaccine – said Dr Fauci mostly kept his knowledge of virologists’ concerns about a lab leak from Wuhan to himself.
The Weekend Australian revealed in 2021 that the National Institutes of Health and other US agencies funded 65 scientific projects at the Wuhan Institute of Virology over the past decade, many involving risky research on bat coronaviruses.
‘Vaccine research was the proximate cause’
Dr Kadlec’s comments give the closest insight to date on how Dr Fauci – who led coronavirus policy for two presidents and influenced the worldwide approach to the pandemic – handled the link between Covid-19 and China. They came as US congressional investigations in the past month revealed how scientists worked to silence concerns about a lab leak.
“I think Tony Fauci was trying to protect his institution and his own reputation from the possibility that his agency was funding the Wuhan Institute of Virology researchers who, beyond the scope of the grants received from the National Institutes of Health, may have been working with People’s Liberation Army researchers on defensive coronavirus vaccines,” Dr Kadlec said.
“I think it’s evident from his later released emails (obtained via Freedom of Information requests) that he had more sense of what his institute had funded at that moment. This was a reputational risk to him and his institute and certainly he probably sided with the international scientists that believed that false or unsubstantiated accusations could have a chilling effect on scientific collaboration between the western world and China.”
p1
Dr Kadlec, in his first ever media interview, added: “We think vaccine research resulted in the pandemic – that vaccine research was the proximate cause.”
In an extraordinary admission, Dr Kadlec said they decided to try to encourage a group of leading international scientists to calm down speculation on the origins of the virus.
The scientists held a phone call on February 1, 2020, in which they discussed concerns that SARS-CoV-2 looked like it may have been genetically engineered.
“When we talked about this in advance of that call, he (Fauci) would just try and see if he could get the scientists to take the temperature down, turn the rhetoric down. to at least find, we’re going to look into this but we don’t know,” Dr Kadlec said.
As both Mr Bush’s biodefence adviser and Mr Trump’s assistant health secretary for preparedness, Dr Kadlec has decades of experience in fighting public health crises. He created Operation Warp Speed, the plan to accelerate the development of a Covid-19 vaccine, and is credited for leading the push to vaccinate Americans. In 2018, he warned Congress the US was ill-prepared for a pandemic.
‘Turn the temperature down’
Dr Kadlec’s personal approach was to ask the National Academy of Sciences in late January 2020, to formally examine the sequence of SARS-CoV-2, to understand its origin. But publicly, he felt it was important to achieve co-operation from China from a public health perspective. Beijing had not yet shared a sample of the virus, critical for developing an effective vaccine.
“We decided to engage our national experts to look at this, the National Academy of Sciences,” he said. “It would take time to figure out what was going on. We were trying to prevent people from saying this was a bioweapon when we didn’t really know. That was my intent. It was Dr Fauci’s idea to see if he could get international scientists to examine the origins in a similar fashion. The object was to prevent speculation and turn the temperature down. There was something that could be said to turn the temperature of rhetoric down and avoid the wild speculation, of a bioweapon, that had already started at that point in time.”
That phone call was at the instigation of Dr Fauci after he spoke with scientist Kristian Andersen who expressed concern that SARS-Cov-2 may have been genetically engineered, because of its unusual features. In an email, Dr Andersen said “some of the features (potentially) look engineered” and several leading virologists “all find the genome inconsistent with expectations from evolutionary theory.”
p2
Dr Kadlec said Dr Fauci kept these suspicions, privately expressed by leading virologists that the virus had been engineered in a laboratory, mostly to himself.
The full extent of those suspicions is now laid bare in emails subpoenaed by US congress and published in recent weeks. In those emails, some scientists discussed the “shit show” that would eventuate if anyone serious accused China of, even accidentally, starting the pandemic. They also discussed the impact such an accusation would have on scientific research and international relations. But, publicly, they insisted the possibility of an inadvertent laboratory leak was a conspiracy and authored a paper published in Nature Medicine, that argued SARS-Cov-2 was almost certainly a natural virus. Dr Kadlec acknowledges the power of that paper, titled the Proximal Origins of SARS-CoV-2, as becoming the official word that a laboratory leak was a conspiracy theory.
“Their paper did result in casting the die for what would then be the international scientific response going forward,” he said.
“I found it really odd that in light of the now revealed private musings of some of the scientists indicated the sequence looked unusual, that the authors decided to draft a letter as an opinion piece.
“Many people were confused or mistaken by what they wrote as more of a peer-reviewed paper.”
Wuhan ‘fingerprints’
Dr Kadlec accused the scientists of having personal agendas that might have influenced their decision to author a paper that suggested a laboratory leak was a conspiracy theory. “Their initial opinion was likely shaded by their personal professional equities or the belief that what was going on in the US – statements by political leaders- could be problematic for world relations for China but also their professional interests in science,” he said.
Dr Kadlec alluded to the febrile political atmosphere in the US under Mr Trump as a likely influence on the scientists, although the scientists’ deliberations began in late January, and the former president did not make any public comment about a potential laboratory origin of Covid-19 until April.
p3
The authors of the Proximal Origins paper have argued in the media and congressional hearings that later virus research had led them to scotch their first fears of a lab leak – and to conclude instead that the origins of Covid-19 were zoonotic: i.e. the virus had been passed from animal to human, possibly via a Wuhan wet market.
However, new emails and posts over the Slack messaging platform that have surfaced in recent weeks pinpoint the moment this group began steering world attention away from the Wuhan lab. It was not months, or even weeks, but within days and hours of their realisation that the virus may contain “fingerprints” that connected it to the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The scientists are facing allegations that they embarked on a campaign of subterfuge that has rocked Washington.
’Blueprint for Covid-19’
Dr Kadlec has now spent a year and a half formally investigating the origins of the pandemic, putting together an A and B team to gather evidence for both a natural and laboratory origin respectively.
Gain-of-function research was banned by the Obama administration but lifted during the Trump era. Dr Kadlec says this was at the behest of the NIH. “Francis Collins and Fauci both had a similar world view which was scientists know best and there should be few restrictions on research,” he said.
The Wuhan Institute of Virology and EcoHealth Alliance drew up a proposal for grant funding for coronavirus research, which international scientists now believe could be the “blueprint” of Covid-19. Dr Kadlec chaired a committee to authorise whether gain-of-function could proceed. The proposal from the Wuhan institute was bouncing around US Government agencies, in search of funding, but it never went through his committee. “It shows you the fallibility or vulnerability of the oversight system,” he said.
Dr Fauci has denied his agency funded gain-of-function research, but Dr Kadlec said this wasn’t true. “It’s evident NIH supported research that has the potential for, and it at least one case resulted in gain of function,” he said.
4 of 4
https://twitter.com/SpillTheMemes/status/1683639667659350018
Been there, yo.
NootBro
@nootropicguy
Big Pharma doesn’t want you to know about Saffron
-
As effective as Ritalin (ADHD)
-
As effective as Prozac (Depression)
-
As effective as Celexa (Anxiety)
Nothing to see here
https://twitter.com/nootropicguy/status/1685014072905887744
those colors gotta go tho
(not this anon's work)
Noticed unusual patterns, used AI and discovered Canadian lotteries are not selecting winning jackpot numbers at random … formulas are used
Preface:
Firstly, I want to say that I had struggled not to use what I discovered to my advantage. It wasn't easy. I came very close several times to just saying no one will know. There were millions of reasons for and millions of reasons against it. In the end I decided not to do it. So instead of enriching myself through my discovery I hope life and fate bless me for exposing what appears to be a very large scandal at play here.
Secondly, I am by no means accusing the lottery corporation(s) or any specific individual(s) of said organization as being complicit in or engaging in fraudulent activity and do hereby claim that I am not placing any legal liability or legal blame on such individual(s) or organization(s). All information provided herein is result of AI (artificial intelligence) gathered mathematical equations and analysis, primary and secondary mathematical analysis, based on data provided by the OLG winning numbers database of published results.
What made me decide to investigate?
About a year ago I began noticing unusual patterns in winning jackpot draws. Numbers and sequential patterns that would not be seen frequently if the draw was truly chosen at random. I would consider myself very well versed in mathematics and I recognized a very specific mathematical pattern coming up repeatedly over the span of several months. It drew my attention even more and I decided to dig into the data of current and past winning jackpot selections.
I started first with Lotto Max. That is where I first noticed the pattern.
What happened next:
I grabbed all the winning jackpot draws for Lotto Max (including the maxmillions draws) from the OLG website. I used that data and compiled it into a database. The first step I took was to isolate all the winning jackpot numbers that appeared to follow that specific sequential pattern I had recognized. I wanted to see how frequent it was and to see if there was a secondary associated pattern of if and when it would appear. And there was. Statistically the preliminary results were very improbable. They were not simply by chance. I wanted to see if I could delve further to uncover exactly what was going on. Little did I know that after many months of work and analysis, I’d uncover more than I bargained for.
I decided to utilize several AI solutions to speed up the processing of equations and analysis and to process the information from the database.
The Results:
I am not going to go into too much technical details (because I don’t want to give out the exact full form formulas in use because I know people will use and abuse them for the next draws to win the jackpots and create a large mess that I don’t really want to be responsible for). So instead, I will give partial formulas and equations and the lottery corporation in Canada can commission experts to launch an investigation and use these samples and discover the exact same thing. There are plenty of high level mathematics academics in Canada that could easily piece together the remainder in a matter of months with what I provide here.
So, what I discovered. There are 25 equations in use. Winning jackpot numbers are not chosen randomly.
These equations generate the winning jackpot numbers. They repeat in use in a very specific cycle. Only a very small number of these equations are on the simpler side and then exponentially increase in complexity.
And how do all of them work? They are all based on date. That is their starting point.
p1
Specifically, the number of days based on day zero to the date in question.
For example, July 25, 2023, would be equal to 739091 days (from day zero).
Why? Because the winning jackpot numbers are chosen by a computer.
If I had guess, I would speculate that whoever did this either hijacked the software at source or maliciously injected code into either the machine directly or some hardware component in the machine and delivered some embedded software/firmware payload.
To prove what I am saying is true, you can go check the following yourself:
There is a minor flaw in 3 of the equations (the simplest ones). They make it obvious that there are skewed results in winning jackpot draws.
Go to the OLG website. Click the Lotto Max option under “Games for you”. Click on the “Winning Numbers” tab in the Lotto Max section. In there you will see the “Have your numbers ever won?” part.
In that part, just pick any set of numbers and click “Check”. You will get results of every time your numbers were in a draw, and how many times in total that has occurred. On average, for any random 7 number choices between the numbers of 1 – 50 usually results in about 35 times to 45 times.
Except when those 3 simple equations come into play.
Check these numbers: (Disclosure, I played these numbers in the last draw because I knew it had a higher probability of getting free ticket plays, and zero chance of jackpot win.)
7, 18, 24, 38, 40, 43, 48 (Drawn 77 times)
24, 28, 38, 40, 43, 47, 48 (Drawn 72 times)
2, 7, 17, 18, 19, 24, 38 (Drawn 74 times)
There is a very specific reason this occurs, and it is because there is a unique pattern and sequence.
Proof:
So here is one partial equation.
For the July 25, 2023 Jackpot winning draw of 15, 16, 17, 18, 43, 44, 48
Equation I referred to as “Simple 2a”
Date equation of 739091 (aka July 25, 2023) a combination of polynomial equations and differences will result in coefficients that are used as the starting point for the following equation: (that will generate the resulting draw sequence)
f(x) = 15 + x, for x <= 3
f(x) = 15 + (ax^2 + bx + c), for x 3
-
For the July 21, 2023 Jackpot winning draw of 4, 8, 14, 25, 28, 40, 41
Equation I referred to as “Simple 3a”
Date equation of 739087 (aka July 21, 2023) a combination of polynomial equation and difference will result in a coefficient that is used as the starting point for the following equation: (that will generate the resulting draw sequence)
Starting point number -ascending prime number sequential order -> rearrange the differences -> sum of primes
Original sequence obtained by taking the cumulative sum of the prime number sequence (next step intentionally omitted)
F(x) = x + 37
(where x is the position of the number in the sequence (1-indexed))
p2
For the July 18, 2023 Jackpot winning draw of 2, 4, 5, 15, 29, 40, 49
Equation I referred to as “Formula 4a”
Date equation of 739084 (aka July 18, 2023) a slightly more complex equation generates lowest and highest integer as starting point then secondary equation forms consecutive number pattern. The differences form between the number pattern themselves form a sequence of integers.
Rearrangement of integers (differences) to ascending order.
Original sequence cumulative sum of the corresponding numbers in the consecutive integers sequence.
f(x) = 2 + 1 + 9 + 10 + 11 + 14 = 47
(where x is the position of the number in the sequence (1-indexed))
Conclusion:
This isn’t just limited to Lotto Max. I simply chose to showcase it as an example here because it involved larger sums of money in its jackpot draws. And it isn’t just limited to this year. It goes back many years.
I don’t know who did this but my educated guess is that it was malicious insertion or source code injection/interception by someone who either had access to the system or knew someone who did. I say this because it relies on date. So if someone wanted to guarantee themselves a sure fire way of always being able to pick the right numbers to win any jackpot (or any prize lower than jackpot) in the future they would base the code and sequence on date. It would have to be complex enough to avoid detection and complex enough for the general public not to figure out the equations. Maybe its an individual, or a group of individuals, or maybe it could even be a foreign entity not within Canada.
What I think should happen: I think all Canadian lotteries should immediately terminate the use of any and all computer based systems for drawing or generating winning numbers of any kind. For transparency, integrity and fairness to all players, the old style of physical ball draws (while televised/live-streamed) should be implemented as a permanent solution.
3 of 3
illuminatibot
@iluminatibot
Speaking on a World Economic Forum panel, Moderna CEO Stéphane Bancel, admits to having prior knowledge in 2019 that there would be a "pandemic" in 2020.
"Moderna had made 100,000 doses in 2019, for the whole year. And I remember walking, after Davos, into the office of my head of manufacturing and I said "how will we make a billion doses next year?", and he looked at me a bit funny and said "what?". I said "yeah, we need to make a billion doses next year, there's going to be a pandemic."