TruthArchive.ai - Tweets Saved By @Jonnywsbell
@Jonnywsbell - Jonny Bell
@Glinner People who are demanding that this war continues, need to realise what will happen...this is not a game... Russia Vs NATO... https://t.co/5ML9R5NQtD
Video Transcript AI Summary
According to a FAS and NRDC survey, there are approximately 23,300 nuclear weapons stored at 111 sites in 14 countries. A nuclear war could begin with an exchange of strikes, escalating into a tactical nuclear war in Europe. Russia could send 300 nuclear warheads to hit NATO bases, and NATO would respond with about 180. Casualties at this stage: 2.6 million.
NATO might then launch a strategic nuclear strike of 600 warheads at Russian nuclear forces, prompting Russia to respond with missiles. Priority targets include missile silos, military installations, cities, and industrial plants. Russia and NATO would strike 30 of each other's most populated cities, resulting in 34.1 million deaths and 57.4 million injuries.
Radioactive fallout would spread radiation, causing acute radiation sickness and potentially 27 million more deaths. A nuclear winter and famine could follow, devastating the biosphere, especially the Equatorial Zone. Scientists estimate that about five billion people could die within two years, underscoring the need for global cooperation to prevent nuclear war.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: According to a survey prepared by the FAS and NRDC, there are approximately 23,300 nuclear weapons in the world stored at some 111 sites in 14 countries. Stage exchange of strikes. After it started and as the nuclear threshold is crossed, the fighting escalates into a tactical nuclear war in Europe. Russia sends 300 nuclear warheads using aircraft and short range missiles to hit NATO bases and advancing troops. NATO responds with about 180 nuclear warheads from aircraft.
Casualties. 2,600,000. When Europe is destroyed, NATO launches a strategic nuclear strike of 600 warheads of US land and submarine missiles aimed at Russian nuclear forces. Before it loses its weapon systems, Russia fires warning shots, responding with missiles launched from launchers, vehicles, and submarines. The main purpose of nuclear strike is not to kill as many people as possible, but to destroy the very possibility of a retaliatory or second strike.
All means of application have priority targets. These are primarily missile launch silos, military installations, large cities, large industrial plants, dams. If the power industry, the military, the government, if the power generation and transmission facilities are destroyed, the state will be destroyed irreversibly. In order to prevent reconstruction of the other side, Russia and NATO are striking at 30 of the most populated cities and economic centers of each other, using five to 10 warheads in each city, depending on the size of the population. As a result of the nuclear exchange, the number of direct casualties, including deaths (34.1 million) and injuries (57.4 million) from the series of nuclear exchanges.
Stage two Nuclear Fallout. The horror of radioactive fallout lies in its ability to spread radiation over a wide area, affecting people, animals, and the environment. Exposure to high levels of radiation can cause acute radiation sickness, which can lead to symptoms such as nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, and fatigue. In severe cases, radiation sickness can be fatal. Twenty seven million more people will die.
Stage three Nuclear Winter and Famine. The biosphere received such a blow that it is unlikely to recover and return to its original state. The ecosystem of the Equatorial Zone, which is tuned to almost constant temperatures, will be particularly affected. There, even if forests are not burned, higher forms of life will disappear, apparently, completely or almost completely. According to scientists, about five billion people in two years may die as a result of a nuclear war between The US and Russia, which confirms the need for global cooperation to prevent it.
Let's say no to any war, and it is better to create something new than to destroy ourselves.
@Jonnywsbell - Jonny Bell đ§đ¨đ´ó §ó ˘ó łó Łó ´ó ż
Attention Men!! Do you enjoy wearing frocks & ladies knickers and hanging around in Women's toilets? If the answer is Yes, The Royal Academy of Engineering would like to hear from you...đ https://t.co/OEMaiVJ7vC
Video Transcript AI Summary
Charlotte Robinson, a straight transgender woman and cochair of the Midlands region at Inter Engineering, shares her journey of self-discovery. Initially identifying as a straight cisgender man, she began exploring her gender identity and sexuality during her university years. Charlotte briefly identified as bisexual before fully embracing her transgender identity after graduating. Amanda Susan McKay, the nuclear quality director for Balfour Beatty, also identifies as transgender and bisexual. She emphasizes the importance of diversity and inclusion in the engineering profession, highlighting that the industry has evolved from its traditional image of a white, male-dominated field. Both speakers advocate for change and innovation to keep the sector competitive and inclusive.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Hello. I'm Charlotte Robinson. I'm a straight transgender woman. And I work for Inter Engineering, where I'm the cochair of the Midlands region. When I studied at university, I didn't really identify that much as an LGBT person.
I kind of assumed that I was a straight cisgender man on the basis that I didn't have any kind of strong feelings that I wasn't. Leading up to that point, I'd always felt quite uncomfortable As a man, and I hadn't really got much of an opinion on sexuality, Gender identity. It was only really within the 3rd year of my degree that I started Experimenting at all with my gender identity, and I suppose my sexuality to an extent as well. Up to that I kind of identified as heterosexual, but I suppose really it was more asexual. There was a point where I kind of identified as bisexual at the time.
But that was, that was very brief Kind of, I wasn't interested in either men or women. So was I maybe bisexual? It was it was only Really after I left university, I came up as as fully being transgender.
Speaker 1: My name's Amanda Susan McKay. I'm the nuclear quality director for Balfour Beatty. I've been there now for about 18 months. I'm transgender. I'm also bisexual.
I think the engineering profession has moved on a lot. The Stereotypical engineer of the white middle class male has gone. It's very much about ability. It's very much about innovation. And if we keep employing the same people, we'll get the same results.
We won't get change And innovation that we require in the sector, you know, to keep pace with things to be competitive, requires There's change, and the industry now has moved a long long way. There are no barriers to joining this profession. I think it has traditionally been seen, is it is that white middle class male environment being an engineer. There was no place for women, for members of the LGBT community. Well, that's wrong.
And I think if you look at the diversity of the industry now, you can see that, that change has
@Jonnywsbell - Jonny Bell đ§đ¨đ´ó §ó ˘ó łó Łó ´ó ż
2019: Dr "Clara" Barker wants university Safe Spaces and Academic freedom...đ¤ https://t.co/gGWtdPZm22
Video Transcript AI Summary
The push for diversity and inclusion means ensuring equal opportunities for everyone, not just tokenism. Universities should create safe spaces where students can learn comfortably and be challenged intellectually. It is important for institutions to take responsibility for their actions and the consequences of their words. For example, having unequal bathroom facilities sends a message that can impact trans students' learning opportunities. We must differentiate between understanding trans identities and questioning their rights to exist. Academic freedom should not hinder a student's right to learn. To truly embrace diversity, we need to have difficult conversations, ask tough questions, create safe spaces, promote diverse role models, and build trust in our institutions.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Right now, there's a big push for improved diversity and inclusion in our society from universities to politics. I wanna explain what that means because it doesn't mean that we have to have the most diverse group of people in every office and classroom. No. It's not tokenism. It means that we wanna make sure that everyone has an equal opportunity to succeed regardless of their background.
So I think that we need to create safe spaces in universities because after all, Universities have a really strong power dynamic. The professor has got all the power. I think there's a responsibility to create a comfortable learning environment if you're really doing your job properly. And that doesn't mean that we shouldn't be challenging our students. We should.
Their ideas should have to be robust. Their ideas should be challenged. They should have to defend their ideas, but not who they are. Universities have to be safe spaces because our success is a brilliant mind. It isn't thick skin.
But if we're really serious about diversity, then institutions have to take responsibility both for our actions and for the consequences of the things that we say. See, if a student goes to an engineering department and the female bathrooms make up those, A quarter of those for the males. That sends a message. A tutor's job is to provide the best opportunity for a student to learn. That's what students are paying for.
And it's hard to do that if you're creating an environment that Calls into question the validity of trans identities. That's gonna impact the students' opportunities to learn, especially the trans students and their allies. We've got to understand that there's a difference between understanding why trans identities exist and questioning their rights to exist. At what point does the academic Freedom of a professor to say what they want, impact the academic freedom of a student to learn. So, yeah, if we're serious about diversity, then we need to start having these difficult conversations.
We need to start asking these difficult questions. And there's no easy answers, But we do need to challenge the way things have been done. We need to create safe spaces. We need to promote our diverse role models, And we need to build trust in our institutions.
@Jonnywsbell - Jonny Bell đ§đ¨đ´ó §ó ˘ó łó Łó ´ó ż
Another Man who's desperate to get in the ladies toilets....đ¤ https://t.co/EFl11Mb0Xk
Video Transcript AI Summary
Charlotte Clymer, a transgender woman, and her friend were at Cuba Libre restaurant when a restroom attendant asked to see her ID, claiming she needed to have "female" on it to use the restroom. Clymer refused to show her ID and later showed the manager the DC law on her phone, which stated that people can use the restroom that aligns with their gender identity. The manager initially disagreed but Clymer warned him about the potential consequences and explained the LGBTQ community's rights in DC.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Charlotte Clymer is a transgender woman and says she and a friend walked into the ladies room around midnight at Cuba Libre restaurant.
Speaker 1: And an attendant from the restroom asked to see my ID. They didn't ask anybody else. And, when I asked why, they said it's because I have to have rest female on ID in order to access the restroom. That's wrong, but, you know, first of all. And second of all, I'm not gonna show my ID to use the restaurant.
Speaker 0: She says that's when the male attendant walked in and started looking for her. After washing her hands, Clymer says the attendant and manager said restaurant. And it was DC law that a person must only use the restroom that matches with the gender on their identification card. She walked outside to look up the law rest On her cell phone to show
Speaker 1: the manager. Went back inside, went straight to him, and asked him to read it. He did, and he said that's incorrect. And, I still don't, restaurants, you know, think that you're allowed to use the restroom. I gave him one more chance.
I said that I work for the Human Rights Campaign. I I need you to make a horse correction right now because this is about to get very bad. And you need to understand the way that laws work in DC in regards to the LGBTQ community.
@Jonnywsbell - Jonny Bell đ§đ¨đ´ó §ó ˘ó łó Łó ´ó ż
Ah! I found the full version of the 1983 PIE interview..... Very strange how everything these two pedophiles are suggesting is now happening in our education systems... Wonder if Peter Tatchell has watched this.... some of their ideas sound just like Peter's...
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 believes that children should be allowed to explore their own sexuality with their peers, but also acknowledges the role of adults in society. Speaker 1 states that their organization aims to give children higher status and recognizes their right to sexual freedoms while protecting them from harm. Speaker 2 argues that an equal relationship between adults and children is not possible due to differences in maturity. Speaker 1 counters by emphasizing the importance of comprehensive sexual education for children. Speaker 2 maintains that inequality exists in such relationships due to immaturity. Speaker 1 disagrees, stating that pedophiles engage in reciprocal relationships with children and that maturity is subjective. The discussion ends with Speaker 2 questioning how a 12-year-old can make a mature judgment about sex. Speaker 1 highlights the child's ability to recognize pleasure and express consent, emphasizing the importance of a responsible and caring approach.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Plus would feel that a developed consideration for children would, involve leaving children alone sexually to find their own way for themselves with their own peer groups and not with adults? Yes. I would be only thankful for, of, Children finding their own way sexually. But I think also that adults have a part to play because children are One part of the whole society. It isn't it isn't a society where we, separate children from adults.
What do you do?
Speaker 1: I feel that, Pai is not a procurement agency for children, never has been, and never will be. Our political objectives include developing a society where children are given a much higher status than today, where they are recognized as individuals in their own right, And this includes recognizing their right to certain sexual freedoms, whilst protecting them from the kind of criminal assault which Took place in Brighton.
Speaker 2: The choice is a question of recognizing children's maturity. And how can you have an equal relationship, which is what I take a mature sexual relationship should be between an adult and a child who is not mature in body, in mind, or personal awareness. It has to be unequal.
Speaker 0: I I don't accept that, this concept of immaturity at all. Adults, for instance, Aren't necessarily mature. It's a long process. Well, I
Speaker 2: take it granted that their adult is probably ever mature. But nevertheless, my state of maturity or your state of maturity is clearly different from that of a child of 12. How can they be in equal relationship, which allows them sex, which is usually a shocking experience for everybody at some time or another? How can you You allow of an equal relationship between 2 people so unequally positioned at the starting
Speaker 1: Experience. But it seems
Speaker 2: at some stage or other, there is
Speaker 0: an element of shocking sex.
Speaker 1: Not if children are properly educated about sex, and it's, an obligation on society to see that children are giving them far more comprehensive Sexual education from a far earlier age.
Speaker 2: So in that case, they find it out. They discover this with people of their own age and in their own time. And it is the question of the equality, which I come back to, which I think you haven't answered.
Speaker 1: Indeed, by your lights, the relationship is unequal in In the same way that a teacher child relationship is illegal, in the same way that a parent child relationship is illegal. If he has a lot.
Speaker 2: Exploiting the child sexually.
Speaker 1: And nor is the pedophile. Pedophiles do not exploit children.
Speaker 2: Child doesn't mean the child's the child's sexuality.
Speaker 1: No. Pedophiles do not use the child's Sexuality. Pedophiles develop a mutual sexuality with the child. It's an entirely reciprocal relationship.
Speaker 2: But you can't say that because of this business of immaturity. I think inequality is the relationship.
Speaker 1: Yes, but the definition of maturity is yours. We don't share it.
Speaker 2: Well, what is your definition of maturity in this context? So how can a child of 12 make a mature judgment about Something like sex for the 1st time, which it has not the 1st idea about and cannot possibly weigh the consequences of it.
Speaker 1: You're imputing to a sexual relationship Heavy judgmental issues No, I'm not. I'm not looking at physical and psychical response. Yes. A physical, a child is able to recognize a Pleasurable experience. He's able to recognize, a pleasing emotional experience.
He's able to express consent And to recognize that this is something he wishes to continue, And a responsible, caring pedophile, it always refers to the, wishes of the child.