IN THE LAST BREAD, the EMB/CH pics dig made a great leap forward cutting the timeframe bookends in half. On 4MAR of this month an anon found a NEW PIC showing the green-lettered FIRST-AID sign dated 27JAN2014. This greatly reduced the outside ‘not after’ bookend from 2MAR2014 to 27JAN2014 for the CH EMB pics.

In particular, the CH2 pic. Prior to this find, the suspected timeframe for the EMB/CH pics had been from Christmas Eve to 2MAR (about 60 days). The new timeframe is roughly 34 days from roughly Christmas 2013 to 27JAN2014. Good work, Anon.

>>15958928

Anon, how did you get that enhanced WW couple pic? I could not comment on it before knowing whether it is a simple enhancement or a blend of another picture to arrive at that image.

Do not want to be thought a gatekeeper, but please be on guard against conflating the images of people at EMBANKMENT (ie the woman with a shoulder bag) with the people at WW (woman with a shoulder bag) without further information.

I see anons have mentioned LP and FF as possible ID’s. To conflate the two locations to the exclusion of one woman over another could possibly exclude the wrong woman from our consideration.

By all means scrutinize both locations separately for each woman.

As for the EMB woman, I can’t rule out LP but neither can I say it is her. As for the WW woman, I can’t rule out FF but can’t say it’s her.

I will say, the woman at WW seems to have a higher hairline than LP and a fuller head of hair, from the front and from behind, in the Q pics than I see in stock images of LP.

I’ve always kept a skeptical outlook that it is necessarily LP at all in the London pics. Imho, Q has let it be known many times that disinfo is necessary and to be accepted as a reality on the playing field. Keeping this in mind, an anon can judge for themselves those times when Q links to anons who have allowed themselves to speculate on the Q pics (NSA trafcams at locations where they would not existing in Winter 2013 according to SV is one example). I think Q gives us a loose leash that allows us to mislead ourselves, (and others). Who knows if Q did not allow us to mislead ourselves when linking to another anon who posted that graphic of LP in a similar waistcoat. Look VERY closely at the woman’s coat in the WW pic from behind. Pay attention to its quilting, the large hood. Belt? Look at the Lisa Paige coat, its belt, the collar area. Hood? My money says it’s not even the same coat.

Spygate/RussiaGate= 2016

London pics= 2013

When did the fBeye thing against Trump happen? In Winter 2013?

Or 2016Could the 2013 thing be some other thing with different players?

Iirc didn’t LP’s bio say she was a prosecutor in some gang enforcement unit before transfer to work with 7th floor. Wonder if she had any MS13 cases.

Just sayin keep an open mind anons.

>>15960059

>The Embankment series shows Lisa Page and Peter Stzrok (FBI Counter-Intelligence) working to make sure Hillary Clinton is POTUS in 2016 Election.

I think not in December 2013.

Here are some questions. Why is an ATTORNEY for DOJ/FBI in London on business.

Agents do agent stuff. Attorneys do attorney stuff. Agents investigate. Attorneys say what can be FILED or shared from a file.

Can agents share stuff in a FILE? Or do you need an attorney to share stuff in a FILE?

When do you need an ATTORNEY? Who is authorized to transport a FILE?

Why would a US ATTORNEY have to go to the UK to talk to someone in the UK GOVT?

Would a US ATTORNEY need to go to the UK to share stuff in a DOJ file if it was about a US citizen?

>>15964214

Thanks anon for putting those together. Speaking only about this your post I am linking to: I think I agree on your placing the 19DEC vidcap toward the top near the NOV dates. I might place the Q pic BELOW the 15DEC date because the #9 bulb possibly being replaced and showing LIT thereafter.

Nao, speaking to your later post showing an additional UNLIT light on the banner of the Q pic: >>15964276

I will agree that the banner lights look weak on the lower left.

So, where do you NOW think the Q pic belongs? >>15964214

The most outlying of the banner light patterns seems the 19DEC vid. We must make some findings about this vid. Do we agree that only that upper left light is unlit? Or can any weakness in the lower lights’ glare be detected? Are we at all confident of the posted date?

Consider this vlogger prides himself on being at opening day. It’s his selling point to be exclusive. That said, did the guy make a comment about that vid being a ‘return’ encore kind of visit? He did regret the haunted house not being up and operating. Why didn’t he say, Oh well, it was great two weeks ago?

Another observation is that the UNLIT LOWER banner bulb seems to be a chronically defective light position in all our samples except 19DEC. Should we take a 2nd look at that spot in 19DEC?

It becomes a mystery then if this LOWER banner, chronically unlit, bulb position is made to operate later. Try a piece of scratch paper and give the 19DEC that unlit lower banner bulb that all the others have. For me it would place it right under the NOV banners. This would make it the last of the UPPER LEFT unlit banner lights.

Then 15DEC. This then allows for either 17DEC or the Q banner to be last.

Note: The above theory assumes burned out light bulbs being replaced on at least 2 or 3 occasions.

>>15964784

I want to apologize for inserting a misspelling of X-MAS GRILL early in the conversation. I hope this hasn’t affected and search results.

>>15966700

Another error I inserted into the discussion is a misspelling of the 17 DEC photographer’s name. Correct spelling: Kalin Kalpachev.

>>15967174

Gud eye. We know what we are looking for nao. What I like about these pics is that it is another PROOF of ongoing bulb replacement. See my next post.

>>15967174

Gud eye. We know whatAn explanation of the use of those yellow rectangle diagrams to attempt placing the pics and caps in a chronological order

See how they might resemble those diagrams they make you sign off on when you rent a car? Keep that in mind as you try to date the pics.

Say you and mates are at the house and you bring out the envelope with pictures of the ole Cortina. The wife likes to have a pint now and then with the girls but you don’t mind; you’ve know a good ‘body guy’ who does good work, and reasonable.

You didn’t put dates on the pics of ‘Tina’ so you are having to remember wot and when certain repairs were made over the years.

Some unfinished repairs are evident across periods of time, coz it’s getting hard to find some parts. Especially that one piece of missing trim.

You can liken our various yellow rectangle diagrams as that kind of situation. Add the incoming proof of bulb replacement efforts on other park attractions as well as the Xmas grill.

>>15967793

May need to look at our 15DEC banner pic. Can’t tell whether or not something could be blocking our view of the left side banner lights in this vid sequence you capped.

>>15967793

Up until nao, we have not made an eaves/banner diagram of this vid, I think, becoz it did not present a gud view of the eaves.

I had mentioned we might try to blend a view of some left side and right side glances within this vid.

As anon was looking for a best view of the candyfloss kiosk am not sure if this is the best view of the banner. Shall we try to include this vid in the eaves/banner diagram collection? Could its ‘taken on’ date could bump the other 15DEC vid sooner?

>>15972053

>To my eye, banner sign bulbs were fully lit in Q pic.

I disagree. At the very least I believe there was at least ONE inoperative, non-functioning, broken light socket that year on the lower part of the banner beneath the letter S of XMAS GRILL. Except for some long shots suffering from light glare in which no unlit lights can be seen, the evidence of this UNLIT light at the bottom of the banner can be seen if we but look. Is it a coincidence that we see a weakness in the lights at the SAME place we see a weakness in the lights in other pics? And that the location for this recurring phenomenon is where other images clearly show an unlit light?

In other images I also see a weakness on the lower left side that equals or exceeds that weakness seen on the lower bar.

As an example of this weakness seen on another date I include 19DEC. I am changing in my own saved images the 19DEC cap to also show this bottom left unlit light. Anons can do as they wish.

In a more circumstantial way but applying common sense logic, if one can accept that there occurred bulb replacement efforts (call them occurrences or whatever you like) then you must notice that after each bulb replacement effort there remained a persistently unlit bulb beneath the letter S on the banner on EVERY occasion (unless you allow for the ONE exception occasion anon is of the opinion occurred)*. But then where are those other pics showing a completely lit banner that are not in contradiction with clear images?

>>15973244

If there was one inoperative light socket on the banner for 2013/2014 then the 15DEC banner diagram would represent what the banner would look look after each bulb replacement effort.

I can almost see two left side banner lights unlit in the Q pic. Speculation follows: Perhaps Q pic is after the 19DEC vidcap showing only one left side banner light being unlit.

>>15973482

Unfortunately, the Q pic could still easily precede the 15DEC vid as well, if they had just replaced the unlit banner bulbs from the Q configuration.

>>15973883

I stand by the theory of a permanently inoperative bottom left light socket. I find it supported by an analysis if the banner patterns and matching of clearer pics. To say the unlit bottom left position defied early light replacement efforts, to later be successfully lighted, to then immediately fail for the rest of the samples is a less credible scenario.

Using my theory of a single defective bottom left banner light socket, I’ve played out some possible banner sequences using the 6 light diagram dates we have so far. Keeping our UK Baker’s admonition re human nature in mind (I did not discount you UK Baker.) I was looking for the absolute LEAST number of bulb replacement events necessary to carry each sequence along.

(As a note: Let’s be quite honest. The MOAR bulb replacement events, the less chance of ever narrowing a date for the Q pic. Every day? Forget it. Every couple of days? Forget it. Every week? Forget it.

IF WE ARE TO RESET TO A PERFECTLY LIGHTED BANNER EACH TIME WITHOUT THE DEFECTIVE BOTTOM BULB WOULD IMPLY A NEW BULB REPLACEMENT AND IMPLY A BLANK (PERFECT) “RESTING” POSITION.

ADMITTING A THEORY OF PERFECT REPLACEMENT BETWEEN WHAT WE SEE OF UNLIT BULBS, WHY THR SAME BOTTOM LEFT BULB BREAKING DOWN DAY AFTER DAY AFTER IT WAS FIXED? THIS WOULD IMPLY MANY REPLACEMENTS.

Even a one-time perfect banner places it betwixt two known banners with a bottom left bulb unlit. And darn that bulb that burns out a day or two right after you fixed it! (Note: I also resolved a situation in which, if you had repaired two other unlit bulbs from NOV, why would you not have replaced the left side bulb when later banners would prove this was possible? I fixed this illogical situation by placing D19 exactly where it should have been, after D17. It would simply make more sense for that bulb position to fail again about 25 days later.)

Want to see a sequence that, so far, requires only 2 BULB REPLACEMENTS to get from one end to the other? Kinda like those logic tests where you connect the dots using only 3 lines or something?

N24

N25

(bulbs replaced)

D15

Q

(bulbs replaced)

D17

D19

See how the dates even agree. It flows.

In 2 other sequences, when I tried to put D19 under the NOV dates or when I tried to put the Q diagram last, it required THREE bulb replacements.

Here they are:

Scenario A:

N24, N25, (replacement), D15, D17, (replacement), D19, (replacement), Q.

Scenario B:

N24, N25, (replacement), D19, (replacement), D15, Q, (replacement) D17

Sorry for the caps but I needed to say moar there and too lazy to go back and change it.

My best suggestion for other anons is to use a good old fashioned note pad, Make vertical flow diagrams using the banner light diagrams.

>>15975187

>What's wrong? The arrows pointing to gaps unoccupied or the black circles over unlit bulbs?

You placed black circles over bulbs that, although they may not appear as bright as the rest, are no where near in appearance as the unlit bulbs in the same pics.

>>15975187

>Suppose the banner was fully lit >in Q pic. Must it have been taken >before, say, 19-DEC-2013 and >not later?

A fully lit banner on 15DEC begs the question why the prior banners all have the bottom left light always unlit. They keep replacing it? Got lucky that one time? I can only make assertions based on the samples we have gathered so far. Am not going to say the Q pic could not have been taken later than 19DEC. Would love to see it around Christmas. But with the samples I see before me…saying what I see. And I also expect to see unlit bulbs on the bottom left of future banner discoveries. Imho, the moar bulb replacements you put into your hypothetical timeline the moar you kill the hypothesis of dating the Q pic.

>The season ran to early JAN and the dig has only just begun for evidence.

Q either hinted or made a Freudian slip when they asked: What event occurs in Hyde Park “IN DECEMBER”.

>>15975187

>Suppose the banner was fully lit in Q pic

Then I’ll say congratulations, you’ve found the day the Q pic was taken- the day they fixed all the burned out lights on the banner and the eaves. What day was that?

>>15974429

>Hoping for a decisive find re banner.

I’m still in this dig with you. Carry on.

>>15975187

>Sequencing the available images is important, natch, but that does not place the Q pic in that sequence, yet.

Alright then.

>>15967174

Same light out at Candy Floss stand in vid dated 26NOV2013.

Third light from top, or middle of five.

BANNER on Xmas Grill seems to have the same lights out as noted on 25NOV and another vid dated 26NOV.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=afe4aEdIgVk

I would cross off 15DEC2013 from the list of possible dates for WW from the amount of late evening precipitation seen this vid from Psyclone Steve. He specifically states the date in comment section of his YT vid. Umbrellas are def out. A gentle rain can be seen on very wet ice at the ice skating park. The ground was wet in the final scene of the vid as the videographer takes one look back at WW park.

>>15989178

Wet ground. Umbrellas out. 15DEC2013.