Quoting Q:

"Total S.A. is a French multinational integrated oil and gas company and one of the seven "Supermajor" oil companies in the world. "

As I said (prior to above):

"Cheap oil to Europe/UK.

That in itself suggests something.

(Q hints they 'get a cut' but I don't think that's the only motivating factor.)"

Here's my follow-up observation: OIL SHORTAGE.

>>1388807

"So anons, I need a new cell phone. What's the least comp'd brand/operating system/ ect…?"

Depends what your needs are. If it's a smartphone, they're all basically pwned/trackable.

Android, pwned:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/01/18/dark_caracal_malware/

Even if Android is off, pwned:

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/11/22/permissionless_data_slurping_google/

Apple, pwned (for now):

http://www.foxbusiness.com/features/every-apple-iphone-can-be-unlocked-phone-cracking-firm-cellebrite-claims

Ubuntu smartphones carry systemd (forced on every Debian OS spin-off everywhere - that should raise alarm bells), which to me looks like a remote code backdoor/insecure piece of shit:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/06/29/systemd_pwned_by_dns_query/

https://mobile.twitter.com/diodesign/status/881297275070234624

http://techrights.org/2013/11/24/tpm-back-doors-patriot-act-etc/

If you're really concerned about privacy/being tracked, my advice: don't use a smartphone. If you use a dumbphone, pull out the battery, pull out the sim card, and wrap it in foil when not in use (passive wireless power sources are a thing now).

From an attitude standpoint: Apple has actually tried to fend off queries by the FBI (unclear if 'just for show'). Google were directly funded by In-Q-Tel during start up, so I'd never trust an Android period.

If a trackable phone is acceptable, it's a case of 'who do you want to track you?'. Bear in mind backdoors might be pwned by hostile forces eventually even if they're not the original owners.

Sorry it's not what you want to hear, but it's what you need to hear.

>>1389667

"But I think they all bend over and plug into Plalantir Technologies. "

You're going to hate me for pointing this out, but Peter Thiel reportedly donated to Trump.

Plalantir Technologies is either from or involved in a lot of things.

Paypal - froze WikiLeaks assets 'as a favour'.

Gotham/Metropolis (actual names, eyeball it) - mil-int spykit.

Facebook - funded by Peter Thiel using resources from Plalantir.

Tech companies bend over for China. 1 billion Chinese = a lot of datamining profit. The Chinese are embracing spy tech/minority report level shit faster than the Americans. In reality, China will just rip the Intellectual Properties out of the tech firms and then keep it for themselves.

But the ability to access data on Americans is invaluable, not to an American agency (they have that), but for a foreign intel agency.

Regardless of what you think of Snowden, he's a watermark that shows that a double-agent could leak far more info. How did the NSA exploits get out? What other information got out?

Think blackmail material on politicians.

America is sold.

Chinese buy-out of bonds, properties, donations to politicians (whether legal or not), goods, services, technologies.

Pedo politicians is a double-edged sword: they can be blackmailed by whoever owns the dirt.

Who owns the dirt?

Anyone. Literally anyone. Hackers. Agencies. Foreign powers. The public.

This is why mass surveillance is an extremely bad idea.

All your blackmail under one roof.

There's no 'clean' politician.

Anyone can control the brainwashed sleeper agents if they know the commands.

Anyone can control the politicians if they have the dirt.

What did Katharine Gun warn of in regards to the NSA/GCHQ on the Iraq war on the UN vote?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/mar/03/katharine-gun-iraq-war-whistleblower

Ask yourself where else have you seen such tactics employed.

Analysis time again:

"Will the EU resort to protecting the deal so the money flow remains in place?"

Yes.

"Why is Kerry in the EU?"

Backup deal.

"Will the US be forced to ban and declare certain EU countries off limits?"

Yes.

Friction, tension.

Might be disastrous for the UK if the UK opts to back the Iran deal, as US is only suitable trading partner v EU.

"Who controls elected leaders?"

"Who do elected leaders report to?"

For both:

Should be the public.

Reality: IMF/Corporations.

"Will Iran expose the names of corrupt officials?"

Lots of factors, hard to say.

If EU keeps deal going, likely to be 'no'.

If US offers incentive, possibly yes (might sully acceptability of evidence though, as it might be seen as 'pay this for this fabricated evidence to appear').

If deal collapses, still on the fence - Iran doesn't like the US, so why blab?

"Will the US expose the names of corrupt officials + con deal?"

Variable. Depends whether or not Iran talks.

If needs to be done before mid-term, then yes.

"We await your answer"

I love our little talks.

"On Guard."

I think you mean 'En Guarde', a French term. Fencing not my thing.

"RED wave coming?"

Variable.

Neutral poll readings, could swing either way. Trump hasn't got a big win or a big loss to cement (big win - vote win, big loss - vote loss). Strongly suspect liberals will heavily mobilise activist forces to vote, I don't see any conservative counter-current to vote.

Also, be aware they've readapted to the old tactics. The anti-Trump hysteria is going to 'disappear' come next election, and this time they will be rabbiting non-stop about some pretend 'anti' establishment candidate with neutral appeal (can't read if they'll wheel out Hillary or compromise and bring out some Macron-esque male). Very hard read.

Strongly advise mobilising voting base encouragement soon, because I think liberals are operating 'stealth mode' with a big surprise lurking. Activist channels are basically very quiet.

"Post midterms."

Contingency plan for failure, unless you've got an ace. Readings are neutral, and pro-Trump vibe is lacking. Normally, voters vote for the 'same again', but I strongly suspect liberals will do mass vote hit and run which will likely tip against. Factor in and counter. Thanks.

"No leaks [unusual?]"

Ignore public leaks when it comes to indictments. Different strat.

Instead, watch for guilty parties fleeing the country. That's the tell for a leak. They don't publish their own implications (nor would they want to as it tips off they know about your legal actions).

Are the indicted mysteriously out of the country for a long period of time? They need only sit outside for 4 years or so. If they're 'temporarily' not in America, you have a leak.

Leakers aren't always vocal. Stay sharp.

"I do not see Snowden as doing us any favors."

Snowden vindicated a lot of what conspiracy theorists were saying about NSA backdoors as early as 1995, or even earlier. The fact it involved 14 countries (14 Eyes agreement) blew a hole in the whole anti-conspiracy argument 'if X existed we would have heard about it by now'.

14 countries and it took 10+ years before we heard anything from one person, a rarity - anyone else would have faded into obscurity or the footnote of a single media page. 14 countries, how knows many people - if they could keep that secret for so long, what about smaller secret ops?

Argued with an academic on 9/11 being a gov-op, he tried to use the 'we'd have heard of it by now' argument, to which Snowden was an excellent counter-example of how long big ops stay secret for (and 9/11 did not involve 14 countries).

The issue isn't Snowden - it's how many people must have remained complicit in silence across those 14 countries as powers got abused and software security compromised.

"Perfect way for CIA to issue standard operating goods."

CIA has always been a profit op. Drugs in Columbia (despite this being public knowledge media still refuse to acknowledge it as a fact), so selling surveillance wares to oppressive regimes wouldn't be outside their scope. FireEye is a CIA spin-off, along with Google (they bend over for China), Recorded Futures, etc.

What's "centralising" exactly by funding startup techs for profit? Nothing. The FBI feels more like the KGB - arbitrary frame-ups of innocents and blackballing politicians - and the CIA should probably just rename to Corporate Intelligence Agency at this rate.

"stole this meme"

Looks like it's from king of the hill, but with chemtrails.

I think the biggest win we could score right now, whilst the other stuff is on going, is to draft the internet bill of rights. I took a stab at it on a completely different forum, and mysteriously the democrats stole the 'right to work' part - which is going to part of their campaign (which, I have to be honest here, I yoinked from someone else, as I was curious the reaction).

What I was surprised by was no-one tried to remove the 'obviously wrong' 'right to work' from the draft (which, I might add, has nothing to do with an internet bill of rights - merely a test to see if people had read it).

I've got a revised version if people are curious. I think the main reason the petition isn't getting enough traction is because the IBOR is poorly defined.

>>1401187

Maybe I'm a bit dumb, but from your link this part seemed even more explosive:

"Outside groups of all stripes are increasingly giving money to news organizations for special projects or general news coverage. Most news organizations, including The Associated Press, have strict rules governing whom they can accept money from and how to protect journalistic independence."

They're literally admitting to the fact you can buy journalism. AP having 'strict' controls means nothing if their selection processes are already bias (IE pro-left).

We need transparency on who buys what from media orgs in regards to reporting etc.

>>1401731

Titled Hyperion. Following the triple-level referencing of MK-Ultra codes, the statement refers to whatever hyperion means (quote->poem (title)->title name meaning).

Greek in reference (a lot of their weird stuff is Greek myth type shit - satellites name Odin, etc):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperion_(mythology)

"Hyperion, a byname of the Sun, Helios, in Greek mythology"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperion

"Hyperion is a corrupt superhero and a Squadron Supreme member. He is a former member of the Cabal."

http://avengersassemble.wikia.com/wiki/Hyperion

Too vague to interpret at this stage. If it is sun related, then is he predicting a solar flare/storm? That doesn't seem like Q's MO to me.

>>1406088

"I knew it was pretty bad, but i was just wondering if there was a "lesser of two evils" choice"

It's a bit like party politics as is. My only recommendation - if you have money to spare - is to go for 'open source hardware' (not closed source, thus nowhere to hide a backdoor, in theory):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_open-source_mobile_phones

If your budget is tight, and you must have a smartphone, then I'd advise getting a second hand one, rooting/jailbreaking it, installing some nonstandard OS on it:

https://itsfoss.com/open-source-alternatives-android/

It'll still likely have hardware backdoors, but any security improvements is better than none. The rest involves keeping the phone sealed (metal container of some sort) and away when not in use and being careful what you do/say on it.

Case in-point: not even the president of the US is allowed a smartphone:

http://www.ibtimes.com/president-barack-obama-not-allowed-use-iphone-relies-blackberry-2016-2347945

I wouldn't trust Blackberry either:

www.spiegel.de/international/world/how-the-nsa-spies-on-smartphones-including-the-blackberry-a-921161.html

>>1406314

"I'd like to see both versions."

I'm not in a position to link back to the original, apologies.

"I probably draw the line at abuse of children."

I solved this issue by mandating the thing be 'speech' (IE something meaningful said). For example, 'X are ruining the country' is saying something meaningful, but showing inappropriate images is not meaningful (you can argue the bollocks over if it's 'art', but to me, art isn't meaningful speech that prompt a dialogue).

Simplified version (numbers - main rights, letters - sub-rights):

1) Right to meaningful speech

a) Anywhere this is deployed as a defence also must include:

a1) 'right of reply' (this means a reasonably unassociated third party has a right for their reply to be displayed in response to the message in question with reasonable proximity. The host need not display all replies, just one of sufficient quality if applicable).

a2) be content neutral (it cannot, say, 'bury' your content using algorithms, censor, hide, shadow ban, obscure, impede, etc)

b) Meaningful speech includes offensive speech.

c) Right of reply need only be enforced by the host of the message, not necessarily the speaker.

d) So long as a) and b) are both met, this gives both host and speaker immunity to libel/slander/etc claims, so long as those offended or slighted have a right to reply.

2) Right to absolute or near-absolute privacy (this includes no backdoors or whatever future spy tech)

a) With the exception of a targeted, narrow scope warrant acquired by a transparent, general public scrutible process signed off by a publicly electable judge.

3) Right to fully own the device you use/buy/obtain

a) That means no 'you buy it but don't own it' bullshit.

b) The right to repair, modify or reverse engineer your device, and install whatever you see fit on it, without fear of retaliation, punishment, contractual cancellation, and so forth.

c) Exceptions granted for repair warranties, but only to the repair/replace element of the warranty (for example, if it was bundled with a connection contract, the connection contract must remain in force even if the repair warranty is void).

4) Reasonable right to internet access

a) Reasonable here means 'not unnecessarily burdensome or extenuating'. For example, even if a country could afford internet access, it cannot be compelled to grant access by buying infrastructure (as the cost, time etc would be too burdensome), but a country that censors pre-existing internet networks can be compelled to grant access.

b) Access to illegal materials is deemed unreasonable

5) Right to protection from 'passive' censorship

This includes:

a) packet throttling/speed reductions

b) ISP DNS manipulation or other such manipulations (this includes both receiving other's contents and posting/sending your own).

c) Other corporate or government level tactics that have intended or unintended effects (EG banning you from access to the internet, serving an injunction)

d) An exception is generated for law enforcement in criminal-side proceedings (civil is explicitly excluded), EG blocking access to illegal online abuse images would be acceptable, for exampe

6) Fair use protections

a) If corporations sue over a subject that is speech, or criticism that is over a copyrighted form of speech (for example, text, sound, video, etc), and it is found the corporation knew or had good reason to suspect the Fair Use was valid, a judge may award an unlimited sum of damages in favour of the defendant (ideally the judge should award whatever damages plus legal costs the corporation were looking to incur). The judge may award this at any time, either prior, during, or after proceedings, and the decision is considered final and cannot be appealed.

b) It may be explicitly requested by the defence

7) Right to reasonable security

a) Separate from privacy (a device may be secure but not necessarily private), a user has an expectation toward a reasonable level of security in regards to their device(s) and data, for example, personal data stored encrypted in a database (so even if not private, it must be stored securely).

8) Unwavierable rights

a) These rights are unalienable and cannot be signed away or waviered by a contract, form, opt-in/opt-out etc, and supercede any contract.

"D5"

Is a move played by black, usually as a defence in chess, specifically, the Scandinavian Defence:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scandinavian_Defense

This isn't the opening move. White plays first. Most likely move white played was E4 to prompt D5.

Assuming this isn't late game mechanics, this is the start of a chess match.

According to this, D5 is a move played within Julian Assange's proposed chess scenario:

https://en.chessbase.com/portals/all/2018/01/assange-tweet/live-database-capablanca-marshall-1918.jpg

>>1414102

"Un-patched BSD / a Linux system vlans ok?"

There's presently no 'perfect security' or 'perfect' privacy device I can see or muster, and I've gotten to the level where I might as well be writing an OS from scratch.

Open/Libre hardware with a barebones OS and one hell of a lot of security features kept primarily offline would be the closest thing to 'perfect security', but that assumes you scrunitise every level.

I prefer a 'geared' security approach where I accept some 'difficult to fix' failings so long as my identified adversary doesn't have the ability to utilitise it, at least, on any meaningful level.

Only 'perfect' security is pen & paper written in very obscure short-hand, using minimal info, kept on you at all times and then destroyed in water mulching that you personally oversee.

Agencies have no inside track - they only know what I want them to know. I keep all my passwords memorised, of which some are over 30 characters long.

Dump all my passwords into a centralised password manager for easy access? Suuuureee.