>Article the other day said to a country “use 5g and lose our intel.” Was that UK?
I believe it was a statement to all FVEY nations. Perhaps more.
A lot of the sites copy/edit/paste news stories. If you search for sentences, you can often find copy/pasted versions on other sites. So if you find a site, you can often spider into lots of other sites with similar content. This often leads to more reputable sites with the same content, validating the story.
You might want to go back, read all of the Q posts since 10/2017, then do a few months of reading of all of the material that has been dug up regarding corruption.
You'll learn something. That's why we're here.
Just as a reminder:
POTUS is now on AF1, out of the country. Insulated from whatever might be going on here.
Might be an interesting week.
I don't know because I haven't read the schedule. It has been posted several times and is likely in the notables (top of bread; scroll up.)
Or, wait a few seconds and someone is very likely to know and answer.
>DS is everywhere and they will certainly try
DS (perhaps more accurately, the cult) is indeed everywhere. However, their structure is vast and fragile. I believe Q has almost completely incapacitated them. Now it is all cleanup, IMO.
>>6657399
>All you will learn is that "Q" is a liar created by some faggot named Defango. There. I just saved you 2 hours.
Your stupidity is breathtaking.
You should read what Kim said again.
>Poster is trying to sabotage the board.
>Same shenanigans on the board all day.
You may have noticed all the Jew shit at the top of ever board. Or not. Maybe you're just new here.
>one of them trying to divide us
^^ This
We're in the middle of it. Most of it isn't generally known by the public, but the public can definitely sense that something is happening. They're just not sure what it is yet.
The reveal will be brilliant.
>>6657600
Here's one...
>>>6657436 KimDotCom tweets about the DS and Snowden
I'd say go for it. Not much danger in it. Anons are told to discern and nobody's sure WTF is actually going on. So there's that.
I'm an idiot - forgot the link
>>>6657436 KimDotCom tweets about the DS and Snowden
I'd go for it. Not much danger in it. Anons are told to discern and nobody's sure WTF is actually going on. So there's that.
>>6657690
>I wont stop until my cock is moist with little girl juices.
You've got serious problems, you sick fuck. Get the fuck out of here. I suggest reporting to a police station to turn yourself in.
>his last tweet was Apil 19th
The date of banning is not required to be the date of last post remaining visible. Details.
>>6657749
>Explain why I am still here, looking for child pornography, anon.
Because you don't understand what the term 'sting' means in relation to legal investigations.
Tick tock, asshat.
>The NSA has all of the root RSA keys
It is even deeper than that. NSA has some shit that would curl your toes.
Those do indeed sound advanced. But think deeper. They can fly through just about anything connected to the internet. They can associate packet streams from anywhere to anywhere, even with significant levels of obfuscation. The reasons why are very, very nonintuitive. Enough said.
>Must suck being evil and watching as your entire corrupt system is dismantled no matter how hard you try…faggots.
What's really funny is that they actually think they're responsible for creating wealth when in fact they're just stealing it from people who create it. They are definitely in for a rude awakening.
"If you think being redpilled is hard, imagine the wake-up call the cabal fuckers are about to go through!"
>They could literally look any target machine up, pop up whatever text application exists in the userspace of the target, and type words at whoever is watching it happen, on screen.
This is technically possible, but no, they're not going to even try to be able to do that. Why? Because it is and would be stupid.
>NOTHING is hidden.
Not quite, but this is a good enough approximation for the reality 99.9999% of the people are in. It is possible to be invisible to the NSA, but they would notice it immediately and try very hard to figure out why you were so interested in being opaque.
>and we're talking about operators, not script kids.
This is exactly why they're not going to try to make text appear on your screen. Because they're not children.