I go without internet for 3 days and all the interesting shit happens.

>>1742234

>You can't transmit a cancer

Straight up lie. The study clearly says otherwise. Re-read.

"In man, only scattered case reports exist about such communicable cancers, most often in the setting of organ or hematopoietic stem cell transplants and cancers arising during pregnancy that are transmitted to the fetus. In about one third of cases, transplant recipients develop cancers from donor organs from individuals who were found to harbor malignancies after the transplantation."

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3228048/

Kill signals are irrelevant as there's only one type of cell that can kill cancer - the killer T-cell - and it's not produced in vast enough quantities to stop a highly aggressive and malignant growth, especially one that attacks the lymph nodes where the white cells are produced.

Furthermore, if you wanted to ensure that the target wasn't able to fend off the cancer cells, you simply bundle in a virus that attacks the immune system like HIV or an immunosuppressant (or deploy it when one is already in effect due to some other condition).

Of course, you'd know this if you had any medical knowledge.

Back to the Q analysis:

Q said: "GOOG OP provided undeniable proof."

Q has also remarked about Eric Schmidt making a beeline for North Korea, and why it mattered that he had resigned.

You see, Hillary Clinton's email servers were hosted on none other than Google (if one checks the source message of a given HC email on WikiLeaks they'll see confirmation, there's also secondary confirmation in news source that was the case).

As it so happens, Edward Snowden revealed that the NSA had unfettered access to Google servers - both officially and unofficially.

Google had been in bed with Hillary for some time, even asking for favours regarding the Syrian regime change (there's endless pieces of coverage on that, I won't re-cover it here).

Long story short: Google and the democrats are best buddies, which is why Google has been pushing an anti-gun message and censoring conservatives (both in searches and on YouTube), whilst democrats largely give Google a free pass on censorship.

What Q is basically saying is they have the proof of the Hillary Clinton corruption emails as a result of the Google-NSA 'cooperation', and thus the so-called 'missing (deleted) 30,000 emails' that the FBI claimed weren't explosive, are still there; some of which are in early draft format as most email accounts progressively save drafts automatically so you don't lose your email.

Basically, what Q is saying is Google's massive data mining policies have gloriously backfired spectacularly in such a way that we are going to see an epic faceplant, not just by the FBI, but also the DNC.

The wheels of justice however turn slow, and Q does have to follow due process.

ES tried to jump ship because he knows he's culpable (specifically: can be compelled to testify), and North Korea is one of the few countries that likely wouldn't extradite him or any proof to the US (Russia would gladly hand him over in revenge for not complying with a lot of their requests, and China likes to maintain diplomacy for trade).

This is going to be an epic reveal, that's for sure.

Even more to the point (the North Korea treaty is going to be very important, especially if extradition is going to be a thing), the emails show evidence of collusion between the media and the DNC - essentially turning the media into the DNC's propaganda arm (a thing extremely self-evident to anyone who saw the disproportionate Trump hatred).

This is why Q was emphasing why Trump was opposed to the fake news media. If you look at the list provided, organisations where proof of active collusion on media stories between journalists and the DNC occurring include:

ABC

AP (remember, a lot of outlets, including Fox news, refer to AP so this is a multi-hit)

AURN

Bloomberg

Buzzfeed

CBS

CNBC

CNN

Daily Beast

GPG

Huffington Post

LAT

McClatchy

MORE

MSNBC

National Journal

NBC

New Yorker

NPR

NYT

PBS

People

Politico

Reuters

Tina Brown (?)

The Hill

Univision

Vice (also part of the David Hogg gun protests in Washington DC, take note)

Vox

Washington Post

WSJ

Yahoo

With Podesta Group as the 'bridge'.

Remember: these are the same outlets that threw shit on the PizzaGate investigations.

Which by indirection implicates one and only one political organisation as being involved.

No prizes for guessing who.

(Also they rabbit a lot of shit about open borders - part and parcel.)

@Q

Whilst walking down the street, I had a thought how you can prove Obama wasn't born in Hawaii (assuming that was the case). You see, it isn't as simple as forging a birth certificate - you need to forge a whole slew of other things as well, including the parent's naturalisation documents.

Now, US law is a bit obscure on citizenship: technically speaking, anyone born on US soil automatically becomes a US citizen de facto, so assuming someone simply 'snuck' across a border and then gave birth (labour is a hard thing to induce, note) their child would become de facto a citizen.

However, it appears the blue state morons picked the only state where that theory could not possibly happen: Hawaii. Located in the dead middle of the pacific ocean, it would have been impossible to just casually 'slip past the border' (unless one boated for many weeks/months, a hardship I can't see Obama's parents even going through, especially when mainland US is far closer).

Instead, what they would need is a couple of things:

1) Some sort of visa, even if only temporary, and

2) Some sort of passport, and

3) An airplane ticket (because a boat when nearing to term would have been too slow).

You see, for the Obama story to hold water, he'd need to be physically present in Hawaii. Now assuming that the alternative story is true - he was born outside of America - there's one person who would have to be physically absent from America besides Obama himself.

His mother.

Which means, any documentation proving she wasn't in the country at the time of the birth (EG travel tickets where she had left but not returned, second home residential in a foreign country, absent visa pass, CCTV footage, recorded evidence of being elsewhere) would be sufficient proof to refute the claims, especially given that if she had left pregnant and arrived without a pregnant belly, it would be damned proof that Obama was never born in the country and would have violated a fundamental law, several, in-fact:

1) No foreign influence in American politics

2) Only natural born American citizens in presidental power

3) Identity fraud

4) Fraudulent documents (especially in the case of a Hawaiian hospital forging them to give false legitimacy)

So on and so forth.

The question is whether or not such information is even available, however.

Q said (regarding snopes):

"Review lawsuit.

Review GoFundMe plea.

Review financial disclosure.

Review formation date.

Review initial investor(s).

Controlled."

One of the few things I'm familiar with as Snopes reeked to high heaven. A LOT of information about Snopes is obscured, but long story short, it was run by a married couple, which makes it less credible than a collection of research orientated anons.

On the lawsuit, the couple split, with the wife selling 50% to another company (I guess that's what happens when your only motivation is money and not the truth). Said company went ape and tried to subvert control of Snopes, at which point the husband filed lawsuit saying they were trying to subvert control.

Because his ass is now totally broke (because apparently 'all knowledgeable', 'always right' Snopes doesn't know shit about legal matters) he's got a beg page up on Gofundme.

Inbetween the lines the company opposed to the husband said he and another employee had been utilising foul play - such as workplace sabotage, including stealing company computers. If the company's claims are true (and aren't mere fluff legal counter-claims) then these are explosive because it means Snopes has no issue being completely dishonest and crooked - the supposed 'source of truth' on the internet.

As it was run by a couple based (originally) in California, the site has a heavy pro-liberal bias. A lot of the articles are often hoc ad, poorly 'researched' (usually it just involves media article info-dump with no actual low-level indepdent verification, which means they would be claiming WMDs in Iraq would have existed etc etc due to such slipshod work), with wordplay/pedantry and abuse of syntax utilised.

For example, Snopes has an article saying "no-go zones don't exist" because they take the term literally (the only way they can interpret it without confirming it's true) to suggest there aren't areas you physically can't enter, as opposed to what the term actually means, IE people AFRAID TO ENTER as in 'that area is a no-go zone' (a VERY well known colloquialism).

Snopes tries to hide it's lack of research behind a flood of copy-pasted well-known debunked scams (IE other people have debunked Nigerian Prince scams, pork maggot myths etc - Snopes merely steals their hardwork).

The irony being, unlike Snopes, I've actually avoided legal action, because surprisingly, I know what the fuck I'm talking about.

(If Snopes weren't ignorant falsehood mongers, they would have known that legally speaking, you always want to distance company/business ownership from anything relationship wise. Ways to have avoided:

Prenup.

IPO.

Board holder.

Nominee owner (IE someone they collectively vote in as acting owner).

Profit share (IE receive share of profits after dividends).

Literally anything other than 'marriage equal share').

'Hi, I'm Snopes, and today I'm going to show you what I know about legal matters.'

Door opens to reveal nothing

Only so long you can remain a fraudulent huckster for before either the truth or another fraudulent huckster outdoes you.

Also, I repeat: the 'independent fact checking' site is a BUSINESS. Profits and truth never mix. You can't make money and 'remain independent'. Prime example: YouTube.

(Contrast 8chan, whose advertisers are not what you'd call 'mainstream advertisers'.)

Q said: "Money NOT security (nuke dev prevention).

Owned politicians.

Returning to the news."

One of the few times I must politely disagree with you Q (the other being the Syrian strike). Iran, as mentioned in the U1 scandal, already has access to the nuclear fissionable material, correct?

The money being applied here would actually allow them to speed up ballistics and nuclear enrichment technology developments. All the Iran deal cancellation did was stop bad money going after 'good' - it didn't actually stop the nuclear fission materials transfer which has already occurred, if my understanding is correct.

So as it stands, if Iran makes profits, they will have the necessary government resources to build. And the EU is looking for someone to sell it's arms to like the US sells arms to Saudi Arabia. EU maintaining access means nuclear knowledge is a very real possibility, and in all honesty, and this is a real talk here, you're not in a suitable economic position to go to war with the EU (you're already engaging China) - don't bite off more than you can chew.

The risk of another Stuxnet damaging already poor quality nuclear infrastructure (globally) is very high. I've got officially on record confirmed SCADA systems running WIndows NT, 2000, XP (Microsoft stopped supporting XP in 2008, I do believe - the others are earlier), and another Stuxnet could backfire horribly.

You'll need to shift gears to one of social - challenge the EU to basically demonstrate it is not enabling nuclear weapons in the region. If you've got proof that Iran rejected inspectors and has 'blind spots', the EU cannot, in any semblance, prove it's not enabling nuclear weapons.

Which means if you provoke the EU sufficiently enough, members within the EU might actually become alarmed at the lack of safeguards. The UK has broken rank, Italy seems like it's considering similarly, and Germany has a populist movement it can't stem the flow of.

The EU's greatest weakness right now is being perceived as being totally incompetent. And I think the best way to help achieve that, if I might be so bias in suggesting so, is not only expose it's fundamental flaws in the handling of Iran, but to also lay down a lot of support to the UK in Brexit (if the UK can be seen as making a successful exit from the EU, it disempowers the EU - the UK can then become a proxy to help other countries, EG Italy to exit).

But a direct trade war with the EU is going to be, at this stage, very ineffective, unless you're privvy to something I don't know about. EU has a weak PR: Greece, Italy, Portugal and Ireland are it's biggest economic failures (AKA PIIGs), UK is leaving, Merkel's open border policy (which is basically an EU policy) is a failure.

Highlight and hit.

Highlight, and HIT.

Also, in the capacity of Trump:

The media have opened up the biggest weakness imaginable with their constant hatred of Trump. It means, for them, they MUST reject everything Trump says, no matter how positive or good. The North Korean talks highlight how far they are willing to go with this - even jeopardising world peace just to 'score points'.

The best way you can make this backfire so spectacularly is to lay down what I call 'fundamental truths'. Fundamental truths is a term for information that, to the common man, is extremely self-evident (for example, someone living in a ghetto in New York would concur the area has a high crime rate), but to everyone else (especially the rich and elite), these truths are 'not' self-evident.

Essentially, what you want to do is lay down truths that the common man know are deep down true, but the media, in what can only be described as liberal hysteria (I've honestly never seen such a crazed mob mental before) will attempt to slander, defame, attack, undermine or oppose such self-truths.

Furthermore, you might want to edge a little closer to their own home territory. If they're forced to denounce facts that they themselves have previously espoused, their dishonesty and manipulation will become so increasingly self-evident that the common man will turn to reject them.

Right now, the media are the 'voice of the corrupt democrats'. You need to take that voice away by discrediting it.

First port of call: remind everyone how the New York Times reported that WMDs were in Iraq (they weren't: where was Snopes then?). They've 'apologised', but it was so late (2013, I think? Double-check before stating), so downplayed and so hamfisted I think they were trying to avoid drawing any attention to it.

Might want to remind the public who were the real fake news of their day.

(It's not their only vice, but there are others. Heck, draw up a list of media outlets who declared WMDs existed in Iraq.)

Q said:

"Amanda Renteria.

Bridge LL & HRC.

+1 BC & LL (Tarmac)

Witness.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/video/video-appears-show-day-bill-clinton-loretta-lynch-41487655📁

Look close (behind BC).

Trusted by Clinton’s.

Running for CA Gov?

Who is funding?

Who is campaign manager?

Risk is HIGH."

Q actually provides the answer to his own question in the same text. Who is running for CA governer? Err… Amanda Renteria:

"Amanda Renteria, a longtime Democratic operative and the national political director for Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign, has filed paperwork to run for California governor. "

https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article200069104.html

That also answers who is funding, who is her campaign manager, and also explains why she is the bridge between Loretta Lynch and Hillary Clinton.

If my deductions are correct:

Amanda represented Hillary's interests at the tarmac meeting which was falsely claimed to be 'just about family' (Amanda is not family, no reason to be present if this story is 'true').

Hillary is now essentially 'buying off' Amanda by funding her, coaching her (who would take advice from a failure anyway?) and otherwise supporting her, so Amanda is clearly not impartial.

IE: Amanda was Hillary's stooge/stand-in at the tarmac meeting to represent her interests.

>>1807842

>Why is "girl in white" freaking out?

There's insufficient evidence to give anything specific, but I can narrow the candidate list based on observations:

1) It's something viewable online (unclear if private or public). The thing that triggers the reaction appears to be a text message, as she appears to 'scroll down' whatever she is reading on her Apple phone.

She then appears to double-check the thing on her laptop (possibly an email?). Seems like private information.

2) She wasn't expecting what it was that she read. She mouths 'WHAT?!' in shock when reading whatever it is on her laptop. That means whatever the event was, is a surprise IE out-of-place, unusual. The 'WHAT?!' suggests an element of outrage, or perceived unfairness, like 'WHAT?! HOW COULD THAT HAPPEN?!'.

3) The news is so shocking she proceeds to immediately reply to the person she already has in a text session on her mobile (most likely person: partner, close friend, close work colleague: my opinion is it's a close work colleague [secondary to this, it might infer an affair is also occurring, but not related to this]).

4) Although we can't read the text messages (too low quality/blurry), we can determine the messages are relatively short (indicated by the box size), including what appear to be emojis.

That tells us it's a 'reaction event' (translation: they're conveying emotions over something that has happened, rather than knowledge, per se). I suspect the other person is either confirming or reacting to the event.

5) She physically signals defensive behaviour at one point, telling us the news is 'bad' and might have an impact on her (she was considering the very real possibility that whatever just happened could also happen to her).

6) You should be able to narrow the events occurrence by identifying when it happened (helpfully provided by the video).

7) I've taken a clip recording (don't bother with my IP: it's not mine) and analysed the key presses for their approximate position (Apple phones have a qwerty keyboard):

In order:

Mid/Lower Left

Mid/Upper Left

Mid-Right

Mid-Left

Mid-Right

(Checks to see if sent/response received)

4 lettered word

(Left?)

Mid-Right

Bottom-left (Space?)

Top-left

Mid-lower-right

Mid-left

Upper-right

Upper-left

Upper-right

Upper-left

Upper-rght?

Mid-left

Bottom-left (Space?)

Upper-left

Mid-right

Bottom-left (Space?)

Mid-right

Upper-right

Upper-left

Upper-right (clumsy Enter?)

19 entries, 18 characters including spaces, appears to be a message. Minimum of 4 words. I strongly suspect there are 5 but I cannot detect where the 4th space is.

I strongly suspect the first word is an 'attention getting' word (a name?), the second is an explanation of their discovery.

Unfortunately, the video quality is bad and trying to keep pace with the rapid presses on mere pixels is extremely hard.

You might be able to combine the above assessment with the box sizes to infer word length. Once you have length, you can work using letter probabilities.

Hope this helps.

Regarding family separation policies (looking like Trump just needs a tad bit of guidance here).

1) Allowing 'family members by proximity' into the country basically unfairly favours larger families over smaller ones, which facilitates mass immigration (especially by those with children).

It's a nasty trojan horse because it only requires one person successfully gain a visa to allow the others in by proximity. So if you have a family of 20, you have 20 separate chances of succeeding.

Instead, I propose that if one intends to bring a family over, they must register a 'family visa': this visa must then state who it is they intend to bring across. This does a couple of things:

1a) They can't retroactively say WHAT ABOUT MY POOR POOR FAMILY if they omit them from the documents: Omission means that family member cannot enter on that person's visa, and must make a separate application as a separate entity

1b) Makes group tracking easier

1c) If a visa is rejected, then it's essentially rejected for that entire family (so the failure doesn't increase the chances, so much as reduces it)

1d) This visa is nationally shared to other border officials, including reasons for failure

2) Separation of children from parents is most likely my fault given I had proposed giving children priority over parents in the event of a limited visa situation, and this is one of those rare times where I have to admit lack of sufficient foresight.

2a) Solving this is 'easy', but the decision making is going to very hard, unpleasant, even.

2b) Firstly, highlight separation was to give children priority over parents - no-one can hate this, as it was well intentioned.

2c) Separation also allows for children to be medically and physically inspected to make sure they're not subject to abuse from family, which can occur in limited circumstances and no child should be left behind (subjects of abuse are granted automatic asylum, which does not extend to family members, unless they do have same signs).

2d) In the event that a child is not subject to abuse, the (going to be deported) parents are given a choice: either they can be deported along with their children, or they can allow their child to be sponsored for a place in the US (this will include care packages etc), with the clear stipulation this sponsorship does not allow them themselves to enter.

If they refuse the sponsorship, then they get deported. If anyone rages about the deportation of children, highlight the sponsorship option - if they truly care about their children they'd accept it. Children are NOT a free pass into a country, nor should they be exploited as such. Any issues with their own country of origin are the responsibility of their own government - and people should focus on addressing the failures in said countries (excl Syria, Libya, Iraq - warzones where this can't be yet fixed).

Of course, the hard decision is whether to separate the families or send them back to poverty or whatever terrible country they've left. However, it might be worth pointing out as there are 'no shithole countries', there's absolutely no risk to deportation as they won't be going back to a shithole.

>>1826593

Freedom of speech is a fundamental constitutional right, and that does include being able to criticise israel, judaism and jews.

The conflation between criticism of a country - that didn't exist prior to or during WWII - and Nazism is a false association.

Nor is being critical of judaism or jews a Nazism ideology (jews critique each other regularly as part of what constitutes judaism - look up how many different groups there are. Saying 'jews' are 'zionist' is like saying all Christians are Anabaptists - it's a misleading falsehood that the non-zionist jews contend with).

Furthermore, Nazi Germany's key traits were:

1) Murder

2) Dispossession of goods, homes, livelihood

3) Mistreatment/unfair/unequal treatment

These are all apt descriptors of the treatment of palestinians within the Gaza STRIP (remember when that used to be a CITY and not a STRIP of land? I do), who in DNA testing share 1/3rd DNA with that of even israeli zionists (so they might as well be murdering and mistreating their own brethern - not that they care because their mistreatment is based on religious ideology and ethnicity identity and not any particular crimes waged).

Criticism does not equate to brutal mistreatment. Anyone who thinks criticism of ANYBODY constitutes something equal to stealing their home, murdering their family and forcing them into brutal labour has not got their head screwed on straight.

Jesus would have literally been condemned by this very law given he was VERY critical of israel and the judaism corruption within.

Are you going to censor Jesus?

EU goes on it's pro-copyright censorship campaign.

Are you using a copyrighted meme frog? (Yes: Pepe is copyrighted, look it up). Are you based in the EU? Then this law impacts you (extremely severely)!

"Both Article 11 and Article 13 were approved by the JURI committee this morning but won’t become official legislation until passed by the entire European Parliament in a plenary vote. There’s no definite timetable for when such a vote might take place, but it would likely happen sometime between December of this year and the first half of 2019. "

"Article 11, a “link tax,” which would force online platforms like Facebook and Google to buy licenses from media companies before linking to their stories; and Article 13, an “upload filter,” which would require that everything uploaded online in the EU is checked for copyright infringement. (Think of it like YouTube’s Content ID system but for the whole internet.) "

https://www.theverge.com/2018/6/20/17482554/eu-european-union-copyright-filter-article-11-13-passes-juri-vote

Q said about the internet going dark.

We can't let this happen. This is bigger than SOPA. Every board owner in the EU, every site owner in the EU… would be forced to MODERATE AND FILTER EVERYTHING, which is too burdensome.

Contrast America's section 230, which makes goddamn sense.

I notice Google, Facebook etc aren't even bothering trying to fight this law. Looks like they want it to happen, quoting the Simpsons "We tried nothing man, and we're out of ideas!".

This is going to balkanise the internet, dividing it between 'Americas and the rest the world' and 'Europe'.

Goddamn EU idiots.

More EU stupidity:

"To make matters worse, the EC will allow EU member states to decide for themselves how the link tax should work. This seems contrary to the Commission’s “Digital Single Market” objective, because it will create significant complexity for all online publishers operating in the EU. They will have to abide by all the different copyright rules in the 27 member states. Existing fragmented copyright laws in the EU is one of the reasons why services such as Netflix took so long to arrive in most European countries, too."

"The “link tax” proposal in Article 11 of the copyright reform directive is another idea that’s not just seemingly bad, but it has also failed in countries such as Spain and Germany, where it has already been attempted"

On Article 13:

"Under the censorship machine proposal, companies would be required to get a license for any copyrighted content that is uploaded to their site by its users. In other words, websites would be liable for any content their users upload to the site. It goes without saying that this could significantly hamper innovation on the internet."

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/eu-censorship-machines-link-tax,37286.html

How about we show the copyright holders what it's like without us nerds servicing the internet, seeing as they find censoring our speech EVERYWHERE to be acceptable.

(Note: Article 13 isn't simply 'videos' or 'images' but also ONLINE COMMENTS. Imagine if a whistleblower leaked documents - cough Wikileaks - and it contained scandalous information, but being corporate, it was 'copyrighted'? Not only would the whistleblower face jail, but anyone hosting information publicly from said whistleblower would be at risk of punishment too.)

>>1832122

Which would confirm the Air force one/marine one theory I put forward that Q is Trump (unlike the media, at no point did I consider Q a 'LARP' - maybe intel level disinformation given the knowledge, but not a troll doing it for kicks).

The beautiful thing is, all the media outlets calling this shit a 'LARP' or 'fake' or 'false news' or 'conspiracy' - and it turns out it is Trump, every single one of those outlets will have been discredited.

In-fact, in any scenario the person turns out to be legitimate (whether high level source, whistleblower or even intel psyop), the 'LARP' claim gets blown right out of the water.

I can only see one very limited, highly unlikely way Q could be a troll/LARP, and the shortstop is it's not very plausible (Q would need to photoshop the shit out of random images and keep tabs on Trump's twitter feed, have automatic posting and exploit the absolute hell out of Forer effect whilst getting insanely lucky multiple times in a row).

Q is most definitely NOT a 'LARP'. And anyone who conflates a 'psyop' (well engineered psychological operation using black/white/grey propaganda) with a 'Live Action Role Play' would have to be the most ignorant fool on the planet, and certainly not a journalist who does ON THE GROUND INVESTIGATIVE WORK as opposed to writing blog style opinion pieces foisted as so-called 'news'.

Remember when journalists did on the ground, undercover investigations like Project Veritas is now doing? Because gone are those days: all we have are 'look nice' presenters who are 'on location' to read some regurgitated autocue script that someone miles away with no real understanding wrote in advance.

You'll know when you're doing legitimate journalism: it's when you're shitting your pants in fear of a lawsuit from the exposed organisation or government.

>>1835754

My strongest advice is to scroll to the bottom of qanon.pub and read up (or alternatively, read from top-down).

Reading Q's posts directly minus any of the Qboard crap (which can be quite confusing - I know I was overwhelmed) is a great way to start.

Remember, when Q first posted, he was largely unknown, so you have the benefit of hindsight.

Once you've read the posts, pick at some of the easier questions Q has posted, or do some basic time/date comparisons (for example, Q posted a Singaporean hotel - the Marina Bay Sands hotel - prior to the North Korean negotiations ever being held there).

Once you've read the Q posts, you'll next want to keep tabs on his current posts (Q posts near daily) and see how his predictions line up with disclosures. I often find that what Q says is later confirmed by Fox news, either directly or indirectly.

Regarding bread (thread) and research, don't worry too much about starting a new bread - just focus on the research aspect.

If you have a specific skillset that isn't so much investigation or research, please check out my 'playing to your strengths' thread:

https://8ch.net/qresearch/res/1813842.html

Remember, you don't have to join in with anything you don't fundamentally agree with, but you'll find all sorts here.

If you like making or posting memes, you'll want the self-service library:

https://8ch.net/qresearch/res/1745576.html

If you want a place to easily read all the breads from, you want the catalogue:

https://8ch.net/qresearch/catalog.html

If you like infographics, you want the side-by-side bread:

https://8ch.net/qresearch/res/93735.html

Once you see a thread you want to post to, post there, if not, post here. If you've got some really good or useful stuff (plenty of links, good deductions, evidence etc) you'll likely want to create a new bread, but don't jump into that just yet.

It's recommended to avoid posting 'thank you baker' and meme posts in research breads as it molds up the dough.

Each bread is capped to 750 posts.

If a bread becomes full, you create a new bread (only if someone else hasn't).

glhf

>>1843239

Not medically trained, so this is purely anecdotal.

Eczema I find is always caused by a chemical reaction. From my observations:

1) Overwashing with harsh chemical soap (liquid soap) with insufficient water

2) Exposure to excessive pesticide spraying (EG living near farms or where aerial spraying occurs)

3) Extremely dry air (humidifiers can rectify this)

4) Cold or extremely cold air (warmth and even moisturiser can help but there's no solution if it's during winter where it's both dry and cold)

5) Open windows/doors might trigger 3 and 4 depending on outside environment.

Try to use the recommended doctor's creams sparingly, I've found they seem to reinforce the condition (which guarantees pharmaceutical companies get a nice continual return).

Shortstop:

1) Avoid leaving any chemicals on the skin (be sure to rinse with water thoroughly - the wrists tend to get missed)

2) Air (somewhat moist, warm, free of outdoor chemicals).

>>1834647

Can you post that to here (which deals with family separation/exposing media ignorance and hypocrisy):

https://8ch.net/qresearch/res/1815001.html

Whilst everything you say is obviously and logically true, can you also provide some links for as many as the points as you can so there's evidence for the douchebag skeptics?

NATO possibly to be dissolved?:

http://www.krqe.com/news/world-news/nato-head-no-guarantee-transatlantic-alliance-will-survive/1253116679

Merkel throwing out yet more German money… this time to Jordan:

http://www.krqe.com/news/world-news/merkel-visits-refugee-host-jordan-amid-migration-row-at-home/1252922218

Yet another 'loan' from the IMF. Just like when it forced a 'loan' on Ireland. Oh you're in debt to the IMF now, you owe us etc etc.

More deepstate corruption.

Has anyone else noticed how so-called 'factbase' selectively omits parts of specific twitter messages relating to Donald Trump? Despite quoting other messages in full?

https://factba.se/topic/deleted-tweets

Here are the twitter messages where it omits stuff (including references to unity and God):

Factbase quotes:

"Our two great republics are linked together by the timeless bonds of history, culture, and destiny. We are people who…"

Missing part:

"cherish our values, protect our civilisation, and recognize the image of God in every human soul."

https://s3.amazonaws.com/rdt-tweets/988874988169121792.jpg

Factbase quotes: "Theresa @theresamay, don't focus on me, focus on the destructive Radical Islamic Terrorism that is taking place wit…"

Missing part:

"within the United Kingdom. We are doing just fine!"

https://s3.amazonaws.com/rdt-tweets/936032830844555264.jpg

Factbase quotes: "So now tha Matt Lauer is gone when will the Fake News practitioners at NBC be terminating the contract of Phil Grif…"

Missing part:

"Phil Griffin? And will they terminate low ratings Joe Scarborough based on the "unsolved mystery" that took place in Florida years ago? Investigate!"

https://s3.amazonaws.com/rdt-tweets/935870484146683904.jpg

Factbase quotes: "RT @Realjmannarino: @realDonaldTrump The ungratefulness is something I've never seen before. If you get someone's son out of prison, he sho…"

"should be grateful to you! Period. I don't care. If Hillary got my kid out of prison, as much as I hate the woman, I'd thank her corrupt ass!"

https://s3.amazonaws.com/rdt-tweets/933291745722351617.jpg

In contrast, factbase will happily quote this entire segment which is far longer than any of the other tweets:

"Alan Dershowitz, Harvard Law Professor: "It all proves that we never needed a Special Councel….All of this could have been done by the Justice Dept. Don't need a multi-million dollar group of people with a target on someone's back. Not the way Justice should operate." So true!"

VERY SELECTIVE OMISSION THERE FALSEBASE!

>>1847114

Not much I can do about the baker infiltration.

BO will need to hire a 'day watch' and 'night watch' mod/kitchen staff to act as filters, or otherwise fundamentally redesign the bread submission process (making it a UI control).

The issue with hiring mods is, of course, they might be shills who then go on to comp board or cause havoc. Off-siting/standardising the research bread procedure is the more sensible way to go, in my opinion.

In the meantime I will hold TTDDTOT. Expect things to get worse - the closer you hit, the more resources they divert (but the more pressure you'll be alleviating off of other boards/forums/sites).

Screenshot of example omitted quotation (one with elipsis) just to show it's as-is.

Second 'deleted' tweet in image. Free timedatestamp with every purchase!

I just presumed this was an external liberal site that has a hardon for hating Trump. Apparently it seems I've accidentally tripped over a baker site that is actually shill incognito?

>>1847190

For my ignorance, can someone explain what (pb) means?

>>1847362

Me or the website? I'm genuinely confused.

>>1847402

No problem.

I always get tired of the political correctness censorship a lot of sites apply, so I always like to highlight when they conveniently 'sidestep' key points.

Usually, what they avoid (Libya, Fukushima etc) tells you what they DON'T want you to know or cover, and thus should have greater focus.

For what it's worth, the link was suggested in the bread "Eat This Bread":

https://8ch.net/qresearch/res/1845021.html

I had perused it because I was curious what tweets Trump had deleted. None of them seem particularly incriminating to Trump and seem very incriminating to the deepstate (I guess he's using reverse logic: delete the most compelling tweets which naturally outlets draw attention to).

>>1847504

Thank you.

>>1848088

The more you know!

Thank you for the explanation.

>>1849225

>there's enough of a difference between normies and cabal whores

Normies shouldn't be given any quarter anyway, and I'm saying this from my former perspective as a normie.

Normies are indoctrinated with 'the truth' which they falsely believe to be 'the truth', and as Morpheus says in the Matrix film, those who are still plugged into the system are still a threat (they can turn into an agent of the system AT ANY TIME).

I've tried convincing various people of various facts, and they all have a differing but specific threshold before they start rejecting information.

Normies will fall into two categories: those who can see what you're saying is the truth, even after a bout of skeptism, and those who will remain permanently skeptical (AKA 'denialists') about everything.

The latter category waste resources and should be frankly burned to the ground or left to rot because they are actively rejecting information because it does not conform to their expectations of reality, which is a mental illness, to be sure.

>>1849866

Windows is compromised, hard. Firefox in my experience has never 'censored' alt sites (worst I've gotten is a security warning once).

Alternative browsers:

Waterfox (like Firefox minus the crap)

IceCat/IceWeasel

Pale Moon (heard a bad rumour about it but nothing substantiated - another Firefox spin-off)

Tor browser is a bit overkill and can limit your browsing options severely. You can install a Tor plugin for Firefox/Waterfox etc but it won't offer the full protection of a Tor browser.

Regarding operating systems, Linux is really the only one I can can recommend (as BSD types I find to be notoriously hard to install).

WARNING: All the Linux OSes I will be suggesting contain systemd which is basically a backdoor. It is my opinion Linux OSes are somewhat less compromised than Windows.

Ubuntu - 'Windows Vista' of the Linux world, great starting point for newbs.

Lubuntu - 'Windows XP' of the Linux world, great for older machines or machines with lower requirements.

If you want a more secure (but my opinion is it is not totally secure) Linux OS, use Devuan, which isn't perfect.

(Security bods will want OpenBSD)

If you plan to install a Linux OS I STRONGLY RECOMMEND A SEPARATE MACHINE for it. The reason being is first time installs classically go awry due to inexperience, and if you install Linux over your only working machine, you have no way to get help to fix the problem.

Linux will run happily on a second hand laptop or machine, so feel free to purchase a cheapo bit of kit for it. It is not like Windows bloat: it is optimised, which is why servers use it.

(I've got a 15 year old+ laptop that runs Lubuntu soundly, no issues. It's screen hinges are broken, it continues to serve as a backup/recovery system.)

>>1850756

Forgot to namefag, above post is mine.

Made an attempt at a lame intro, at first started seriously but then turned kinda 8chanish by the end. Feedback appreciated:

https://pastebin.com/S9GNSHW7

>>1851800

CPU level backdoors are a whole 'nother layer (poster is a newb and they're usually not able to handle complex security).

Software level backdoors make exfiltration of data easier. Yes, IME can in theory view runnin OS, but that assumes Intel CPU to begin with. Letting the poster know risks of choices upfront helps them be aware of risk management.

Solving the hardware issue depends. Libre hardware, open-source hardware, or even GNUboot (Libreboot?) can help mitigate. Spectre and Meltdown make IME utterly redundant but we all deep down knew it was in there.

Regardless, don't let perfect be the enemy of good. The fewer backdoors, the fewer issues you're going to encounter.

Strangely, the worst the deepstate could do to me was a self-replicating wifi 'bug' that crippled the wifi on the firmware level.

The wifi would 'work' enough to connect to the router (and infect other devies), but it would not connect to the internet. Mysteriously disappeared after I started trying to investigate it.

Funnily enough, I had tipped off Kapersky about it just prior to the deepstate going utterly ape on them and ripping them to shreds.

Wifi 'bug' also impacted Wii U, which told me it must have a Linux OS. I later learned Switch was on FreeBSD, which spooked the shit out of me.

Never got a good look at it. Disappeared before I could dig. Best guess based on ancedote was 'something something wifi drivers'.

Four machines hit. All different hardware wise. All Linux.

>>1853350

>https://edgylabs.com/mozilla-firefox-initiative-to-eliminate-fake-news-from-its-browser

I knew Firefox were going corrupt when they eliminated the majority of 'non-conforming' user-made extensions (which allow people to defend themselves against encroachments).

I hurled them an angry letter over their stupid 'happy or sad' feedback form as if we were simpletons, demanded to know why they had sold out to the likes of Facebook (Mozilla also datamine the absolute shit out of you - check out what info they send in the 'crash reporting': long story short: EVERYTHING. Read through - no system spec aspect missing).

Guess what? No fucking reply. Then the facebook scandal hit, with Mozilla blushing how they'd 'protect' you from Facebook - what, by sucking their dick?

Goddamn traitors, and that's the first time I'd use that word with it's intended meaning: pretending to be pro-pivacy and pro-freedom whilst secretly doing NEITHER.

>>1863331

Problem with 'social entrepreneur' (I'm arguably a 'social inventor' on the conspiracy side of things) is they lack real world experience or any semblance of real world knowledge to know what people are actually experiencing.

All these programs do is fast track young minds who've been coddled since birth in reasonably decent accommodation (and, for example, have never experience violence, hardship, poverty or extreme duress) and what you end up getting is a 'young officers' mindset, where their perception of reality (often 'liberal idealism' with naivety like 'the government would NEVER try to take your rights away!') is seen as the truth and anyone insisting otherwise is some lowly racist bigot peon.

Elon Musk is an example of what I'd call 'young officer syndrome'. He presumes his electric cars are what's going to change the world. But an 'officer' with real world experience will know the majority can't afford a car that costs even more than $2-4,000, tops.

Ford (the Nazi eugenicist racist bastard he was) knew that cars had to be made cheaper for them to gain popularity. Back then cars were something like the cost of a house. Right now, electric cars cost about 1/2th to 1/3rd of some cheap properties.

All Elon is doing is 'inventing' (cough, Nikolai Tesla, cough cough - also a eugenicist, for some reason) a car that uses current day technology stuffed in at premium prices. Which isn't a social change. It just another expensive car in a line of expensive cars.

On the other hand, individuals like myself prefer to point people to the freest or cheapest available option for something. 'Young officers' will say go to university, get into debt (theirs got paid off). I'd say 'avoid university, learn the skills in your own free time using online free resources, and keep applying and reapplying to jobs as an intern or trainee for such skills).

Being 'smart' is useless if you're not also knowledgeable. You know how much I spend on computer hardware to 'keep pace' with the high technology of the corrupt? Probably no more than about £100. Per 5 years.

With a security level arguably on par with or better than most corporate or organisations I've seen (said security is standardised, and improves with additional knowledge). It's not great, I'm sure a professional hacker could bust in, but eyeball the price tag.

Now who's the social entrepreneur? For $40,000 I could supply an entire data centre.

Also, in answer to Q's '5:5' remark (he really wants people to answer that, it seems), the answer is:

Five eyes:

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

Five Power Defence Arrangements:

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

You see, the hint was dropped on a 'stackexchange' question about the North Korean meeting and why it was in Singapore - and that part got quoted.

I've known about it for at least a month now, but have been sitting on it to see if someone else would get it or if it was aimed at me.

Looks like it was aimed at me.

Wanted to relay a dream I had about Q. Don't try to read into it, it's just a dream, found it weird and compelling:

I was an investigator for a serial killer who went by the name 'Q', and apparently the police department thought all the killings (at the time 3, and the 4th one was in progress) were random, where-as I argued they followed a pattern.

Police force had argued 'no no, not all serial killers follow patterns' but I was like 'what's the point if there's no pattern? To them it's just a game', and I was determined to prove it.

In what was probably influenced by Agatha Christie's ABC murders, the first two murders were women who were technological capable - at first the police thought it was sexist or some shit - then the third murder was a man. 'He did it to throw us off the case' the head declared.

I wasn't so sure. I re-read the case files, and the possible fourth targets (Q had been known to strike unseen, some thought poison, but he was seemingly never present). Some died poisoned, others in supposed accidents, one stabbed. I met this obnoxious prick of a woman who was this pharmaceutical shill who was a possible target.

Then it clicked.

The patterns of murders were based on whether they were corrupt, and how they died was determined how they were corrupt. For example, this woman sold defective pharmaceutical products, so what Q had done was trick her into using her own 'medicine' that she hocked and scammed to other patients - refusing to believe it was faulty due to a deluded mindset - which in turn would result in her dying.

Q was literally killing the corrupt bastards with their own corruption. The accident was a car accident - a manufacturer who sold faulty circumspect parts. And the stabbing was someone visiting a ghetto advocating unchecked immigration.

Trying to warn the fourth woman, she ignored it: 'OUR PHARMACEUTICAL PRODUCTS ARE NEVER DEFECTIVE'. To which I replied 'you just keep on taking it then, we'll see if you end up dead'. I knew one way or another I'd be proven right.

Could I really stop murders when people die by their own hand, I had thought?

Just needed to clarify:

>The patterns of murders were based on whether they were corrupt, and how they died was determined how they were corrupt. For example, this woman sold defective pharmaceutical products, so what Q had done was trick her into using her own 'medicine' that she hocked and scammed to other patients - refusing to believe it was faulty due to a deluded mindset - which in turn would result in her dying.

'Q' had done this in the dream by sending her a letter that he had poisoned her food with a specific poison. As a precaution, she took the antidote, which was the faulty and useless pharmaceutical product she sold onto other patients.

In the case of the car, 'Q' had sent some message that caused the car driver (car manufacturer who sold faulty parts to others) to flee their house in terror - driving their faulty car above a safe speed and triggering the fault in the car to kill them (they lost control of the vehicle and went into a barrier).

The letters were the only way the police knew it was happening. And the only way they knew of the possible targets is because multiple people received (usually the same letter) at about the same time.

Forgot to add, after I figured the murders, I deduced the name of the murderer (there was a cryptic clue in that 'once my murders are complete you will know my name'). I realised there were going to be '5' - another word for 5 is 'Quint'. To which I realised was short for the murderer's name, being 'Quintin' (because Quint got 'in').

>>1875795

Q RM [AP13]

>>1883881

>any useful diggs on brain health and autism

I'm probably going to look like a fucking magician to some of you at this rate.

Stop calling it autism. Look up 'dysexecutive syndrome':

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

• Symptoms exactly the same

• Has a cause, unlike 'can't be treated' autism

Look for physical injuries to the skull. Usually symptomatic of abusive childhood.

Brain is an amazing tool, can self-repair. Needs two nutrients in bulk: Omega-3, and Omega-6. Avoid fish itself because these days it contains mercury (especially if American) or oil (Gulf of Mexico).

It's something like Omega-3 to Omega-6 ratio of 1:5 to 1:16. Don't worry about Omega-6, practically everything gives you that. Omega-3: found in walnuts, flaxseed, spinach (ALA format, supposedly 'harder' to process but there's no study nor no proof of this), fish, or a supplementary oil pill.

Ground flaxseed can be added to anything and everything (tastes a bit like sugar, kinda), specially soups or sauces.

Regarding the supplement pill, it seemed that:

• Taking one daily

• For at least a year

Is what gained the most improvements. Improvements to hand-eye over about 3 months can be seen. Changes aren't always immediate.

This won't confer any social skills (if you're intending to learn, lurk on https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/ and start observing the shit out of how people react), but it will reverse majority of brain damage. Vaccines (containing a shit ton of chemicals) WILL UNDO THIS WORK, so AVOID. A single vaccine is sufficient to blunt any intellectual capacity you might have regained.

Omega-3 effects are only useful if you're under 21, impact is blunted at 18 onwards (essentially, the younger, the better). Only those with initial brain damage are likely to see improvements. If your brain is already functional and undamaged, this won't confer any real benefits. 21 and later it will merely 'maintain' the brain and reduce degradation.

Enjoy.

>>1885793

You realise that 'autism' is basically an 'uncureable' 'mental disorder' that allows pharmaceuticals to sell you what is basically speed for the rest of your life.

You know, the same speed drug that governments will tell you that will fuck up your brain. The solution to a mental disorder is a drug that causes brain damage when used regularly? Anyone remember the Ritalin 'zombie' incident.

Autism is primarily a label - people behave differently just on hearing the word. Half of the battle is not calling yourself that (the other half to stop your friends and family to stop parroting it). Try it against a control group - meet some new people, don't immediately introduce yourself as autistic (don't let your girlfriend or anyone do so either) and see if they 'spot' it: chances are they won't.

Disease supposedly only identified in the late 20th century. For something that supposedly relates to social problems it's taken an awful long time to be noticed (contrast Downs syndrome). Also protip, you have a girlfriend - the classic claim about autism is it impacts 'social abilities' (IE social outcasts, loners), the fact you have a girlfriend is a counter-tell.

Still, self-identify if you want, it's basically the 'trendy thing to do' these days.

>>1887614

>Sounds like a way the Powers at be can enslave a group of people identified as a danger to their plan by medically categorizing them. They now can control them through legal process!

You sir, have hit the nail RIGHT on the head (don't forget for pharmaceutical companies it's basically lifetime profits).

Parents not giving zombified medication? Hark! Child abuse! Better seize them and force the 'medication' on them.

Notice everyone retroactively classified (in history) as being 'possibly autistic' are always the smart people?

No wonder Ritalin zombified. They're the exact class of kids who pose a threat to 'the stupid that be'.

I found every bastard loophole imaginable as a kid. It's not so-called 'child abuse' if the child themselves rejects the so-called 'medicine' and refuses attendance, and people can't do fuck all against a kid lest their own system labels them as the abuser.

"Forthcoming"

4th coming.

The 4th of July.

Independence Day.

Black guy wearing Trump hat and shirt berated by people for daring to vote for Trump (100+ comments within 10 hours, not counting eye rolls, stares etc):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZPapHk0kjk

The black guy never says anything during their walk.

I find it hilarious in the video there's a white guy who stops to lecture the black guy on freedom and Nazis and why he shouldn't be voting for Trump. Because apparently black people aren't allowed to vote for whoever they please and must be told by some stuck up liberal.

Not surprising the democrats were the ones who voted against blacks having the vote historically, now that I think of it. If all the other liberals and democrats have a similar attitude that black people aren't smart enough to know who to vote for (unless it's them), wow, the arrogance is astounding.

Let them vote for whoever they want. Or did Abraham Lincoln not actually win?

Time to open your eyes, guys (quotes are intended to be key snippets and don't represent the full video):

"a central kind of agitator training"

"we want to come from the people, we don't want it to come from the [democratic] party"

"birddogging" - term for making sure democratic activists are at the front of the line at Trump rallies in order to ask Trump questions

"we have mentally ill people that we pay to do shit"

"I've paid off a few homeless guys to do some crazy stuff"

-"bird dogging" - mentioned in Wikileaks emails

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IuJGHuIkzY

"we've been bussing people in for 50 years to deal with you [republicans] fucking assholes and we're not going to stop now, we're just going to find a different way to do it"

"I got a priest to cry on camera once"

"we manipulated the vote with money and action, not with laws"

"I think backwards from how they would prosecute if they could, and then try to build out the method to avoid that."

"you can prove conspiracy if there's a bus. If there are cars it's much harder to prove." (Uber?)

"So you use shells. Use shell companies."

"when you get caught by a reporter, does that matter? Because does it turn into an investigation or not? In this case, this state [WN], the answer is no, because they don't have any power to do anything."

"you implement it across every Republican-held state"

"can we make something special [voter fraud] during the midterm elections in 2018?"

"Not asking them [voters]. Making them."

"beating the shit out of them and then making them [the voters] do it."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hDc8PVCvfKs

"we have to clear this with the DNC"

"In the end, it was the candidate, Hillary Clinton, the future president of the United States who wanted ducks [Donald Ducks, the costume ridiculing Trump voters and Trump avoiding tax returns] on the ground, so by God, we will get ducks on the ground"

"I think this duck is going to get roughed up somewhere"

"I almost got punched … I was in a duck costume"

"If the future president of the United States wants ducks on the ground, we will put ducks on the ground."

"Tomorrow we start this initiative on the tax returns. So, tomorrow morning, at Trump Tower, I hope we can arrange it so it goes down the escalator. We will launch Donald Ducks."

"A guy in a Donald Duck costume with a sign that says, "Donald Duck's releasing his tax returns.""

"We put out a whole blast and a release around the idea that he was ducking."

"reporters thought it was silly"

"But you know what? We ain't talking to reporters, we're talking to voters." - democrats think you're all idiots, who need to be coddled with safe spaces and donald duck mascot suits.

"but that story is not exactly what you want to hear about how presidential decision-making happens."

"the operation is to insert and get the duck message in there if we can, or the extremist message"

"we have to clear this with DNC" - showing DNC will happily label people in opposition to them 'extremists' - same people subject to censorship laws

"20 to 30 into the events [Trump rallies], where they all have their phones set to go off at the exact same time, on an alarm, with the duck call"

"We just ordered a thousand rubber duckies with 'Donald Ducks' written on them to hand out to people in the press" - but I thought they weren't targetting the press? Ah, what a tangled web you weave

"The [donald] duck has to be an Americans United for Change entity. This had to do only with some problem between Donna Brazile and ABC [news], which is owned by Disney, because they're worried about a trademark issue."

"our signs [now] say "Trump ducks releasing his tax returns." And we haven't had anymore trouble."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EEQvsK5w-jY

>>1892270

That's a personal journey for you to explore and consider. No-one can truly know anyone fully, and there's nothing I think people can offer you for what is a personal conflict. Only you can truly resolve your own personal conflict, maybe through investigation, maybe through belief.

A consideration, though, although this won't answer your question: do you think any family know what their own members do when working in an agency? Agents, officers, etc are not permitted to discuss what they do outside of work, and are often sworn to secrecy for a lifetime.

If it's not something you could know, is it something worth worrying about? Some things cannot be answered. We cannot always know the full details about anything or everything, motives or intentions. Cherish the memories, don't worry too much about achievements and medals, or the realness of moon landings, they were a father first and foremost, and that's what's most important.

>>1894506

When you say it spreads, it sounds kinda like fungal infection like facial ringworm (which is a misnomer, it's not actually ringworm):

https://www.skinsight.com/skin-conditions/adult/tinea-faciei-ringworm-of-face

Scratching would in theory spread the fungus (I've never seen Eczema spread, personally). Could also be a bacterial type infection.

Try out an antihistamine (with no other medicines) as a 'depth tester'. Antihistamine temporarily reduces your body's ability to 'react' to foreign allegens. Rashes are usually caused by reactions - if the antihistamine works by itself, then it's an allergic reaction. If not, then it's likely a skin infection of some sort.

I like the tripcode I've gotten.

In a totally unrelated note, do you guys think bitcoin might be the NSA's attempt to build the world's largest password cracking/hashing algorithm where the reward for breaking passwords is imaginary currency?

Don't even have to pay anyone any cash.

To the non-corrupt agents:

Spotting the corrupt prosecutors and judges is easy (might lead to unravelling other corruption too).

Look for anyone who is placed under 'house arrest'. House arrest is not a normal means of punishment within a court system, especially not for pedophilia (Jeffrey Epstein) or bank fraud (Robert 'Bob' Creamer).

Compile everyone who got charged with a serious offence, but didn't receive a serious punishment (EG house arrest).

That will tell you which judges and which prosecutors are crooked.

Remember, it takes both of them to tango: prosecutors can offer 'plea deals' unnecessarily, and judges can fix or modify the sentencing. Any non-corrupt judge would slap down a bad punishment, any non-corrupt prosecutor would recommend a suitable punishment.

Start digging.

PS: Does undermining the justice system by offering lax punishments count as 'perversion of the course of justice'?

PSS: Might want to implement a law that prohibits house arrest for serious offences.

Wanted to post this as a thread, couldn't (the file option is missing, for some reason):

Jeffrey Epstein (pedophilia) and Bob Creamer (bank fraud), despite committing serious crimes, got non-serious punishment: house arrest. Seems like house arrest is the wrist slapping by judges and prosecutors repaying a favour or two: AKA corruption.

Who else went under house arrest? Lets find out:

Kenneth Landrieu (first cousin of New Orleans Mayor Mitch Landrieu - Democrat), placed under house arrest after pretending to be a police officer and threatening someone with a gun:

https://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2017/12/kenneth_landrieu_road_rage_sen.html

Pedo gets house arrest (ironically twice longer than what Jeffrey Epstein got despite Epstein committing more serious offences as a pedo):

http://www.pottsmerc.com/article/MP/20180613/NEWS/180619890

Ben Arredondo (democrat), committed bribery, fraud and extortion. Guess what? House arrest:

http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/ben-arredondo-gets-a-grand-total-of-zero-days-in-prison-in-corruption-case-6632249

Mayor of San Diego Bob Filner (democrat), committed false imprisonment and battery - punishment included, err, house arrest:

https://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/16/us/criminal-charges-for-bob-filner-former-san-diego-mayor.html?_r=0

John Cowdery (shock - a republican) involved in massive corruption scandal, given, err… house arrest:

https://www.adn.com/uncategorized/article/cowdery-violated-legislatures-ethics-code/2010/01/22/

Governor of Connecticut John G. Rowland (republican) also involved in corruption, err… punishment included house arrest:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/16/AR2007061601331.html

State Representative Frank LaGrotta (democrat), also involved in corruption, bank fraud, gets house arrest (you get the fucking idea):

www.yankeeinstitute.org/2016/10/former-state-representative-convicted-of-bank-fraud/

Lieutenant Governor of North Carolina James C. Green (democrat) convicted of tabacco fraud scheme, literally just house arrest (and again, far more than Epstein ever got, seeing a pattern here?):

http://www.newsobserver.com/2007/02/14/36300/before-black.html

One-term democrat, Kathleen Kane (involved in perjury, obstruction of justice) hopes for slap on the wrist house arrest - prosecutors oppose the move:

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/oct/14/prosecutors-oppose-house-arrest-for-ex-pa-attorney/

Corrupt judge 'considers' Kathleen Kane's request for house arrest (since when do criminals get to pick their punishment? Please sir, don't give me the death penalty, a nice stay at my own house is wot will teach me to do no wrong):

http://www.timesherald.com/article/JR/20161017/NEWS/161019838

Judge gives Kathleen Kane her house arrest request:

www.mainlinemedianews.com/news/region/judge-approves-house-arrest-study-for-kathleen-kane/article_9fe3d7d9-fcb9-5140-8bcc-6a2720481bee.html

"Actor" Robert Conrad to get house arrest for driving whilst drunk (and putting other people's lives in danger - involved in a crash) because being famous is what gets you out of jail, right? (note the name of the website):

https://www.uniondemocrat.com/csp/mediapool/sites/UnionDemocrat/LocalNews/story.csp?cid=3711299&sid=753&fid=151

Former Mayor Patrick D. Cannon (democrat) caught illegally voting, faces house arrest, maybe federal prison:

https://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/07/us/convicted-ex-mayor-of-charlotte-is-placed-on-house-arrest-after-illegally-voting.html

Connecticut Governor John Rowland (republican) accepts gifts (bribes) from contractors, gets house arrest:

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/blagojevich-joins-illinois-govs-bars/story?id=15928257

Hudson Hallum (democrat) bribes voters, commits voter fraud, gets err, house arrest, fine:

http://www.nwaonline.com/news/2013/jun/20/ex-rep-hallum-be-sentenced-election-case/

State Sen. Leanna Washington (democrat) committed campaign fraud, gets a measly 3 months of house arrest:

https://www.pennlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2014/10/state_sen_leanna_washingtonget.html

Woman makes false claims about disabled veteran owning her business in order to get US government contracts, sentenced to 'home confinement' (house arrest):

https://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2014/10/teaneck_woman_sentenced_to_home_confinement_for_claiming_company_was_owned_by_disabled_veteran.html

"Former State Supreme Court Justice Joan Orie Melvin will pay for her corruption convictions with humiliation and house arrest" - judges being soft on judges? What a time to be alive!

http://triblive.com/news/adminpage/3946628-74/melvin-court-orie

Geraldine Ferraro's (democrat) son, John Zaccaro Jr, sold crack cocaine to an undercover state trooper, got house arrest:

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/26/geraldine-ferraro-dead-dies_n_840995.html

>>1902189

I'll bite.

Your MK-Ultra shit is reverse engineerable. I bet you're suspect to it. You can try to use all the shampoo you want, but it ain't gunna wash, boy.

Last MK-Ultra handler to try some shit started blabbing state secrets. You're not the only hypnotist with downcount in the room, and I'm pretty sure my toolset 'Trumps' yours.

That's the problem when you standardise backdoors into everything: someone can just waltz right in and hijack it all from you. 'CIA sleeper assets everywhere' screamed the psychiatrist in the hotel room. A couple of tips for your future 'never gunna happen' operation:

1) Sleeper cells should be isolated, and no singular person should know that they exist 'everywhere' or even use the same asset signature. SOF: you left all your keys in one box.

2) Use different passwords next time. I think you'll soon find the Recursive Mind Virus has 'lockout' capabilities, and it helps the victims themselves want to overthrow their abusers.

3) Bad idea to standardise your ASSASSINS into a single stale universal call. I'm sure you wanted your 'spontaneous uprising' with 'assassinations of heads of state everywhere', but I think you will find that uprising has become surprisingly muted. Worst still: you no longer control the assassins. What does one do with assassins anyway?

Be careful who you send, you might find them working for the other side.

One man army. :)

See, trying to expand your 'skillset' by acquiring 'more assets' always runs the risk of accidentally revealing your passcodes, techniques and 'hashing algorithms' to other people.

Time for you to put on a white hat I think, and be good.

In the meantime, put the shampoo away, I'm sure there's something more constructive you could be doing. Some insights into the weak points of CIA corruption would be nice - can you see any way to dismantle it with minimal bloodshed?

And whilst you're at it, treat yourself to something. Bastards probably put you through a lot of shit, so go relax, have a nice dinner somewhere.

Also, your thoughts on the operation codename would be nice. I was thinking something ironic, Operation Mop sound good to you?

>>1904961

Damn, P2P as the means for dismantling the CIA?

"Together we know everything, together we have everything"

https://wiki.p2pfoundation.net/Main_Page

Even has the Q reference in it.

And yeah, luxury food does seem a bit greedy, but I only meant it as a sort of treat. If you've got something else you'd rather do, then by all means, do that.

And yes, the satanic symbolism does indeed seem to be part of their trigger set. What's the deactivation sequence for 'Kidz with Gunz' by Gorillaz? I get one of the band members has the upside-down cross, but it's unclear how one has 'Kids with Peace'.

>>1905121

Social media seems very aptly aware of the Clinton body count.

What you need to do is break people's stranglehold of media - at the moment, they are not diversifying their media sources which makes them VERY circumspect to media lense distortion, and they need access to 'on the ground' and 'independent' viewpoints.

If they broke away from the singular media source appeal (query: why is it so addicting?) they would naturally encounter this information in the wild.

@Trump: Going to need net neutrality reinstated, or at a minimum something that protects P2P systems. You think you can get that past Big Telecom, or is it too big a risk at this stage

@Snowden: need a workaround for P2P packet sniffing that can't be snooped by NSA or NARUS level shit, all ears for proposals. If we can't legally force ISPs to carry P2P we need to make it indistinguishable from normal traffic patterns.

Also, need legal scope on P2P issues. How does one avoid being incriminated on (unintentional) local hosting of possibly criminal materials? Issues with distributed computer networks is some people can distribute illegal CP which then makes everyone on the network liable for CP distribution even if totally unaware, which LEO are trying to exploit for frame-ups and artificial crimes (by transmitting said CP onto a network and then indicting the person/people on said networks). Need legal and technical workarounds on this please.

>>1906669

Good suggestion to carrier the Recursive Mind Virus in a meme, that would get broad spectrum coverage and fast. Can even piggyback it into one of the Q memes so we knock out more of the sleeper cells.

As it so happens I have an uncanny knack for naturally producing memes (memes are just slightly catchier variants of 'injokes'), so I might shift down a gear into something less serious.

>>1906871

Commercial liens is only useful against something commercially owned, and wouldn't stop upstream injection of malicious, illegal or frame-up evidence by bad state actors (or just typical criminals themselves).

EULAs have limited effectiveness, and can't supercede a federal or sovereign law. Section 230 only applies to a single host (and the protections against someone uploading CP maliciously are gone), and is only American-centric.

Plausible deniability I believe doesn't really stand up in case law (for example, even if the host storage was encrypted in a way the host doesn't know what is inside, technically they are still distributing that crap).

True encryption or 'multi-layered encryption' (AKA quantum encryption - where a message could decode to any possible message) would add a valid plausible deniability, but if the feds uploaded it, they know what's inside.

Fragmenting across a network means no-one holds a complete copy, but it also runs the risk of indicting multiple people and allowing for 'shotgun frame-ups'.

Temporary storage is a partial solution - as it means the frame-up is wiped after a single session - but it would negate the permanence or stability of the P2P network.

Selective hosting or 'host only reviewed content' is a possibility, but it removes plausible deniability (IE you acknowledge you permitted say the encrypted file in that could be named 'PerfectlySafe.pdf') and would cripple automatic redistribution within a P2P network.

A generic server farm that handles the bulk of automatic redistribution of all P2P data under a shell company that is off-site could mitigate the issues, but then it's not truly P2P and presents a bottleneck.

It's a horrible mess, and definitely a bastard tactic that is difficult to overcome. I suspect a combination of temporary encrypted and permanent encrypted (reviewed) storage might be the solution.

>>1907941

Just to make it clear, I don't touch on violent revolt or active war. Violence for me is a last recourse of action unless absolutely backed into a corner (and unfortunately I must admit I've had to fund less than desirable practices because I was not making headway).

The closest to war you'll get me on is topics partaining to inanimate objects (for example, the Korean missile defence program as a way to contain the NK nukes, or anti-killer robotics). Even then, what I offer is extremely limited because a lot of ideas I could propose could easily be reverse engineered to kill or threaten people. I only do what is minimally required to maintain the balance and to buy peace more time, nothing more.

I will not partake in the violent overthrow of Iran or the Syrian war (besides ensuring the Syrian government does not fall to prevent massive regional instability, a power vacuum and a destabilising of the delicate balance of world superpowers).

There's no 'peaceable' regime change that can be achieved by any conventional means, and without full scope knowledge of all the sides, factors at play, agendas etc I refuse to partake in destabilising a regional government, because doing so can upset the very delicate balance of powers (and violent change is often instigated by external powers looking to gain a substantial advantage of some sort and is rarely naturally occurring in my opinion).

Changes in human rights, freedom of speech etc always occurs from within. Consider the changes within Victorian Britain and the treatment of the poor, or the civil rights movement within America. These didn't destabilise the regional government.

Wind back the clock. Iran is a pretend theocracy. Their system is pretty much 1600s in how it works. How do pretend theocracies usually transition from one political type to another?

>>1911935

One of the active research breads on the main page would probably be the best place to put it.

When adding it to a research bread, be sure to:

Title it.

Add a synopsis (basically a longer summary).

Provide the link.

Earmark it as a 'possible notable'.

I'm not going to beat around the bush. Psyop.

I've interacted with the community to get a feel of the matter. The community themselves are very genuine, everyone (myself included) genuinely believes corruption should be stopped, no matter what the cost.

I also strongly concur that the media are wholly inaccurate in attacking Trump, their information consists of anti-Trump zealotry that lacks proper research. I also condemn their view that Q is a 'LARP', and if anything their attacks lend Q credibility.

I refuse to believe the media are so stupid as to attack everything openly, because normally if there is something they don't want you to know, they don't attack it - they ignore it outright. When was the last time the BBC reported on Fukushima or Libya? Libya is still a hot warzone, but you wouldn't know that because they killed any active reporting after the so-called 'victory' to make it seem like everything is good there.

I also definitely concur that liberals and democrats are corrupt, double-standards utilising shady-ass bastards, and their mistreatment of religious people, conservatives and republicans stinks to absolutely high heaven. So I have absolutely no issue with it being a pro-conservative message (if anything, it makes me support conservatism and see liberalism as basically a cancer - I had a disdain of liberalism prior but the levels of distortion are intel agency propaganda distortion).

I will also concur a number of statements Q makes are correct (especially statements partaining to media, the fascist flag design of antifa, and more) and I suspect if I had more time I would find more of them are accurate, which is why I wholly reject LARP. I also genuinely believe Q has access within the Trump administration (I still stick to the view it's Trump, but who it is specifically, for me, doesn't matter).

But, and there's a huge but, there's three major key concerns (yes, I know, concernfags tend to be shills, hear me out, these are documented), and they are:

1) Support for the Syrian war (opposition to Syrian government)

2) Support for overthrowing Iran (opposition to the Iranian government)

3) Clear cut evidence of petition numbers on the White House site being tampered with

I'm aware a majority will already be opposed to the idea of destroying the Syrian government or overthrowing Iran, although I'm aware some don't believe petition numbers are altered.

Firstly, my biggest issue with the Syrian strike was it was done without vote, as a kneejerk reaction to what was clearly a false flag. If you notice, no inspection report has been since released confirming any of the claims by either the US, UK or France. If Q was about truth, he wouldn't have supported a sudden rush. The basis for his claim was 'good intel', however, we're always told of intelligence (Iraq war) which later turns out to be false.

If Q was transparent, we would have seen such evidence. I would have also accepted the strikes if they had been voted for by the people even if there was no intelligence (you will want to eyeball how much a cruise missile costs these days).

(cont.)…

…(cont.)

Second, the Iranian overthrow. In one of the breads, a researcher posted a series of images of a news article about the Iranian protestors, the comments of the protestors should be a red flag something fishy is going on:

https://8ch.net/qresearch/res/1912644.html#q1913214

>“No to Gaza, no to Lebanon,” the protestors chant in one video. “Palestine and Syria are only a cause of trouble,” they chant in another.

Notice all the countries mentioned are exactly the same group and countries that israel are opposed to? As I snarkily quipped in-thread, the protestors might as well said 'death to israel's enemies' to be less subtle. Q explicitly supports an overthrow of the Iranian government - and these are the people who are trying to instigate it. Notice like the earlier passage, they too are opposed to the Syrian government.

To make it clear: I have no issue with Trump terminating the nuclear deal. Based on Iran's behaviour and the shady going-ons, I agree terminating it was the right thing to do. I do not believe in subversion of government because you're basically saying it's acceptable for external foreign interference to occur in your own country - something everyone here has a huge beef with.

Thirdly, the point about petition numbers being altered. This was a classic thing that occurred regularly under the Obama administration, especially petitions about being opposed to vaccines. As Q seemed to be a Trump insider and they were promoting WH petitions, I was open to the consideration that the petition number tampering had been purged.

However, this isn't the case, and I wish I had the original post to hand - an anon had posted timestamped evidences of the petition numbers… decreasing (under the Obama administration, the numbers just froze). This was on a petition that was clearly one Q had recommended - IBOR. If Q, or indeed the Trump admin are trustworthy, why are the numbers on petitions fluctuating on citizen sponsored petitions?

I'm aware of the 'counter argument' that 'israel is being left 'til last', however I have a bone to pick with this because it reeks of the Zionist belief of Gog-Magog - the whole world going up against them in war and losing. Militarily, you never leave your strongest opponent until last, and I don't see how helping israel achieve military objectives in Syria or Iran helps Americans get rid of corruption within US politics, especially given that military corporations stand to make wide profits on any such military action.

I refuse to believe Q would simply happen to follow the israel playbook play-by-play by accident given their clear knowledge (fundamentally, liberalism is pro-Palestinian, so attacking liberals falls nicely within their schema). I also refuse to believe that Q would simply 'fall into' an earlier poster's prediction of Q attacking Iran when trying to predict Q's identity many months back.

(cont.)…

…(cont.)

This isn't considering the fact the people haven't seen any jailings of people who have committed heinous crimes such as raping children or colluding with foreign enemies. If this is indeed a psyop, then I predict you never will see them jailed (a resignation is not punishment: they just land in another cushy job because US government jobs have 'revolving door' politics - James Comey came from HSBC, for example - same guys involved in funding Mexican drug cartels).

As a result, I'm forced to conclude despite the accuracy of numerous statements, and the media attacks, that Q is some sort of pro-israel psyop (or at best, a genuine neocon who is still playing into the hands of AIPAC at the American taxpayer's expense). I am personally tired of the 'overthrow this country' or 'overthrow that country' - at this rate, there won't be a country left in the globe the US hasn't overthrown!

Rather than make this a public condemnation in it's own dedicated thread, which I'm sure will be perceived as an 'attack' and dismissed regardless of the validity of statements, I will end as I largely started out: within TTDDTOT.

I've ensured that, through-out my interactions whilst exploring the Q matter, that I've tagged my posts with an identifiable name so you know I wasn't acting subversively as multiple accounts or 'hiding in the shadows'.

I hope I've been able to help other people - especially in exposing corruption (I believe I proposed a petition ledger to make sure petition tampering would be obvious), and I depart on amicable terms. This is clearly a great community, but I would say Q is trying to lead you up the garden path when it comes to military conquest of other countries.

(A question: Why is it they call for military overthrow, even killings, of other countries governments, but not the same for the child rapists within your own government? Think about that very carefully.)

(cont.)…

…(cont.)

If, somehow, the crooks within the US administration do get jailed, and israel does find itself no longer overthrow murdery (because think about it: once they've crippled Iran and Syria, America is the next threat for them to cap), I will happily admit error (I'd rather be wrong and see crooks like Hillary Clinton in jail), but until that time, I cannot be a part of the Q community because it implies support for the external interference in and overthrow of countries, a violation of sovereignty we'd never accept on our own country.

I hope I've been of help in my limited time here, but I must bid you adieu. I look forward to the answers to my questions from Q on the 4th of July (Independence Day) and hope they are sufficiently convincing for me to change my mind, assuming Q doesn't ignore the questions or sidestep the Q&A entirely.

Good luck to anons in kicking corruption's ass, it's been a pleasure.