Anonymous ID: c8285d Dec. 9, 2023, 6:25 p.m. No.20050331   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>20050287

>Not trading spit with infected idiots was effective, too.

Agreed, but natural law seems to favor humans swapping spit in several ways rather indiscriminately through a variety of mechanisms and especially so during periods and at locations of higher population densities. Natural immunity confers the best protection available on these populations. Consumers of cannibis may enjoy a slight advantage in these circumstances with respect to the indicated virii.

Anonymous ID: c8285d Dec. 9, 2023, 6:42 p.m. No.20050410   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>0419

>>20050391

>Q will never post here again.

'The termination of a MILDEC is concerned with ending the MILDEC in a way that protects the interests of the deceiver. The objective of a successful termination is to conclude the MILDEC without revealing the MILDEC to the adversary.

 

Successful MILDEC operations require strict security. This begins prior to execution with measures to deny knowledge of the friendly force’s intent to deceive. Apply strict need-to-know criteria to each MILDEC operation and to each aspect of that operation. Employ active OPSEC to deny critical information about both actual operations and MILDEC activities; knowledge of MILDEC plans and orders must be carefully protected. To ensure adequate protection of information, all MILDEC information must be correctly classified and handled in accordance with the current Joint MILDEC Security Classification Guide.'

 

…I conceal my tracks so that none can discern them; I keep silence so that none can hear me.”

Sun Tzu

The Art of War, c. 500 BC

 

Here's the source doc if you have further interest: https://jfsc.ndu.edu/portals/72/documents/jc2ios/additional_reading/1c3-jp_3-13-4_mildec.pdf

Anonymous ID: c8285d Dec. 9, 2023, 7:23 p.m. No.20050579   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>0589

>>20050570

>Q will be called on all the lies

The Significance of Deception in Contemporary Information Warfare

the major methods of deception are:

• Presenting data to the adversary that represents the truth as you would want them to perceive it. This is achieved by presenting a tailored subset of ‘real’ data, and/or manipulated data, and/or depriving the foe of any data, and/or disrupting the foe’s data collection, and/or • Setting the context in which the foe interprets that data, and/or

• Producing ‘noise’ in the communication channel so that the foe receives only the data allowed by the deceiver.

Information Warfare and Deception, Informing Science, Volume 9, 2006

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/49277989_Information_Warfare_and_Deception

Anonymous ID: c8285d Dec. 9, 2023, 8:25 p.m. No.20050889   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>20050876

>RealJamesWoods

The light will reveal those on the team and those pretending to be.

This is not a game.

They want us divided.

Last posts [self destruction] will immediately show the world the TRUTH.

Instructions will be sent on how to preserve offline.

You didn’t think this was simply about words did you?

We have it all.

Coming soon to a theater near you.

Q

Anonymous ID: c8285d Dec. 9, 2023, 8:33 p.m. No.20050920   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>20050902

>HOW … STUPID ARE YOU?!

It's not the concepts you are communicating that create the problem, Anon. Your posting style limits responses. You've become the new Finkelstein walls of text poster.

Anonymous ID: c8285d Dec. 9, 2023, 8:52 p.m. No.20050991   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>20050946

>Didn't Sullivan do the same thing? the judge against Flynn.

>wouldn't drop the case, when the DoJ told him to.

 

His tenders parts were in a vice, IIRC:

 

Well, he took the extremely unusual step of appointing a retired federal judge, John Gleeson, as a “friend of court”—just a few days after Gleeson wrote a harsh polemic against Flynn in The Washington Post. Sullivan tasked him with investigating whether he should agree to the dismissal and whether Flynn should potentially be charged with perjury (?!) in connection with initially having entered a guilty plea.

 

The implications of Sullivan’s moves were staggering.

Moreover, it’s been 3-1/2 months since the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, sitting en banc, gave Sullivan a face-saving “out” to continue handling the case, overruling a panel decision that had ordered him to immediately dismiss the case.

The en banc court gently prodded him to resolve the issues quickly, saying, “we trust and expect the District Court to proceed with appropriate dispatch.”

Unfortunately, he did nothing of the sort, demonstrating that the “trust” of the appellate court was misplaced. Given Sullivan’s questionable conduct throughout the case, it should have known better.

 

And now, it appears he’s only dismissed the case because Trump’s pardon made it moot. As one news outlet blared, in a headline that illustrated Sullivan’s appearance of partisan bias, “Judge takes final shots at Trump, Flynn as he agrees to dismiss case.”

Let’s be clear here. At this point, Sullivan didn’t have a choice. And troublingly, he tried to tilt the scale in his favor on unresolved issues surrounding the scope of a federal judge’s authority when both the government and the defendant agree that criminal charges should be dismissed.

https://www.heritage.org/crime-and-justice/commentary/judge-sullivans-long-overdue-dismissal-flynn-case-reveals-his-bias