Was there already a War… and We The People lost long ago?
Seems like We the People didn't even put up a fight.
never promote bad behaviour.
only time to think.
Ban genital mutilation of infants!
https://archive.org/search.php?query=creator%3A%22Deutsche+Gesellschaft+f%C3%83%C2%BCr+Christliche+Kunst%22
https://archive.org/search.php?query=title%3A%28%2Agypt%29%20AND%20date%3A%5B1830-01-01%20TO%201945-01-31%5D
Welcome to Q Research General
We are researchers who deal in open-source information, reasoned argument, and dank memes. We do battle in the sphere of ideas and ideas only. We neither need nor condone the use of force in our work here.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."
VINCIT OMNIA VERITAS | SEMPER FIDELIS | WWG1WGA | QRESEARCH
Q's Latest Posts
Wednesday 06.29.22
Saturday 06.25.2022
Friday 06.24.2022
Q's Private Board
Find Q drops here
Main QAnon.pub - qresear.ch/q-posts - QAlerts.pub - operationQ.pub - QPosts.online - qanon.news/Q - 8kun.top/qresearch/qposts.html
Backups qntmpkts.keybase.pub - QAlerts.app - QAlerts.net - douknowq.com/134295/Q-Anon-Pub.htm - we-go-all.net/q.html -
QPosts Archives
-
QMap & Mirrors PDF: SCRIBD: https://www.scribd.com/document/419874308/Q-Anon-The-Storm-X-VII?secret_password=55SQ1tCYhuNR8ESzm50u
-
QPosts Archive, Players in the Game/ Analytics on Q posts & More: qmap.pub
-
QPosts Archive, Searchable, interactive with user-explanations: qanon.pub qanon.app
-
QPosts Archive + RSS, Searchable, Analytics, Offsite Bread Archive: qanon.news
-
Spreadsheet QPosts Q&A and all images backup: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Efm2AcuMJ7whuuB6T7ouOIwrE_9S-1vDJLAXIVPZU2g
-
Q Raw Text Dumps: q-clock.com/q_raw.txt
-
Spreadsheet Timestamps/Deltas: docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1OqTR0hPipmL9NE4u_JAzBiWXov3YYOIZIw6nPe3t4wo/
-
Memo & OIG Report Links: 8kun.top/qresearch/res/426641.html#427188
-
Original, full-size images Q has posted: https://postimg.cc/gallery/29wdmgyze/
Q Research
Welcome
Tools and Services
TOR Link: http://8kun.top.4o5xwl3fsmzwys7edqxtohvva6ikxc6h7wt7el4ar3d5om6k2zz7yaqd.onion/qresearch/catalog.html New
Join Us
lie, and fuck you.
This is the most amazing press sec, and smart people on the world, and Tucker, it is number one on tv, and he has cut commercials, so you are a criminal, and I will fuck you all day.
B/C I know how to find you, and now you made me very angry!
I alpha-maled your grammar, boy. ALPHA-MALED. I'M THE GOD DAMN ALPHA-MALE AROUND HERE.
why do you post this for?
>Follow the Football
pic related
>Watch Bidan Tiger Team
no thanks I already had heart attack
>[DEFCON] in the News
so what none of us can do shit but be scared by it in Fear, fuck fear it's a virus.
>Who send Nuclear to Ukraine?
CIA/State dept, hillary, Biden, Pelosi, Schumer Maxine waters, Schiff, fuck answering your questions YOU ANSEWR THEM! bitch
>Re read the Crumbs in the Chanel
fuck the channel and it's Q 2.0 larp
>You have more than you know
okay daddy.
>Where is IAEA?
pic related
>Where is [N]ato [N]uclear Watchdog?
nato/un/dyncorp are terrorists
see : https://www.brighteon.com/15b49b37-9126-4e39-9286-a094ed8d60ea
>Think Oil [P]ipline Hack 2020
Think Pipelines George Webb talks about!
>Who have a Meeting in 2020 before the virus start? NATO Wuhan Games. Who had lost 1200 fcking vials before that! Ft Dietrick
>Why is this now relevant?
Jesus tits. fuck off.
>Another [FF] Coming.
and another and another and another your worhtless.
>Define Gurilla Warfare ?
1972 your on I-5 in the Jungle of Guatemala and the Gurillas come out on your ass. Ta ta ta ta ta all dead.
>Why Nato Planing a Meeting in Spain and Germany?
NATO/UN is friends wih NAZIS
>For what is the Talk?
let me count to 100 so there's no violence first you fucking pece of shit.
>Define Great Reset?
multinational conspiracy propaganda terrorism theft genocide treason by WEF sleeper cells and NAZI family children like IG Farber, Prince HEARTBURN /burnhard, klaush Schwab and all the agencies capture underneat.
>What is Clade X?
don't care.
>What is Atlantic Storm?
don't care
>What is Dark Winter?
more horse shit
>Who Control WHO?
CCP i said that, yeah I said that already
>Follow the Money!
pic related
>Follow the Ties!
NAZI Zelinskyy WEF/NATO/UN/dyncorp/State Dept/Biden/Hillary/PElosi/Schiff/on and on.
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES (PDF ATTACHED, 11 PAGES)
JAIME CAETANO v. MASSACHUSETTS
on petition for writ of certiorari to the supreme judicial court of massachusetts
No. 14–10078. Decided March 21, 2016
Justice Alito, with whom Justice Thomas joins, concurring in the judgment.
After a “bad altercation” with an abusive boyfriend put her in the hospital, Jaime Caetano found herself homeless and “in fear for [her] life.” Tr. 31, 38 (July 10, 2013). She obtained multiple restraining orders against her abuser, but they proved futile. So when a friend offered her a stun gun “for self-defense against [her] former boy friend,” 470 Mass. 774, 776, 26 N. E. 3d 688, 690 (2015), Caetano accepted the weapon.
It is a good thing she did. One night after leaving work, Caetano found her ex-boyfriend “waiting for [her] outside.” Tr. 35. He “started screaming” that she was “not gonna [expletive deleted] work at this place” any more because she “should be home with the kids” they had together. Ibid. Caetano’s abuser towered over her by nearly a foot and outweighed her by close to 100 pounds. But she didn’t need physical strength to protect herself. She stood her ground, displayed the stun gun, and announced: “I’m not gonna take this anymore. . . . I don’t wanna have to [use the stun gun on] you, but if you don’t leave me alone, I’m gonna have to.” Id., at 35–36. The gambit worked. The ex-boyfriend “got scared and he left [her] alone.” Id., at 36.
It is settled that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms that applies against both the Federal Government and the States. District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U. S. 570 (2008); McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U. S. 742 (2010). That right vindicates the “basic right” of “individual self-defense.” Id., at 767; see Heller, supra, at 599, 628. Caetano’s encounter with her violent ex-boyfriend illustrates the connection between those fundamental rights: By arming herself, Caetano was able to protect against a physical threat that restraining orders had proved useless to prevent. And, commendably, she did so by using a weapon that posed little, if any, danger of permanently harming either herself or the father of her children.
Under Massachusetts law, however, Caetano’s mere possession of the stun gun that may have saved her life made her a criminal. See Mass. Gen. Laws, ch. 140, §131J (2014). When police later discovered the weapon, she was arrested, tried, and convicted. The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court affirmed the conviction, holding that a stun gun “is not the type of weapon that is eligible for Second Amendment protection” because it was “not in common use at the time of [the Second Amendment’s] enactment.” 470 Mass., at 781, 26 N. E. 3d, at 693.
This reasoning defies our decision in Heller, which rejected as “bordering on the frivolous” the argument “that only those arms in existence in the 18th century are protected by the Second Amendment.” 554 U. S., at 582. The decision below also does a grave disservice to vulnerable individuals like Caetano who must defend themselves because the State will not.
The events leading to Caetano’s prosecution occurred sometime after the confrontation between her
A subsequent bench trial established the following undisputed facts. The parties stipulated that Caetano possessed the stun gun and that the weapon fell within the statute’s prohibition.2 The Commonwealth also did not challenge Caetano’s testimony that she possessed the weapon to defend herself against the violent ex-boyfriend. Indeed, the prosecutor urged the court “to believe the defendant.” Tr. 40. The trial court nonetheless found Caetano guilty, and she appealed to the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court.
TheSupreme Judicial Court rejected Caetano’s Second Amendment claim, holding that “a stun gun is not the type of weapon that is eligible for Second Amendment protection.”
Although the Supreme Judicial Court professed to apply Heller, each step of its analysis defied Heller’s reasoning.
The state court repeatedly framed the question before it as whether a particular weapon was “ ‘in common use at the time’ of enactment of the Second Amendment.” 470 Mass., at 781, 26 N. E. 3d, at 693; see also id., at 779, 780, 781, 26 N. E. 3d, at 692, 693, 694. In Heller, we emphatically rejected such a formulation. We found the argument “that only those arms in existence in the 18th century are protected by the Second Amendment” not merely wrong, but “bordering on the frivolous.” 554 U. S., at 582. Instead, we held that “the Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding.” Ibid.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/14-10078
Thirded