>>7772209 (lb)
>Attorney General Eric Holder argued that the targeted elimination of a "senior operational leader" of a terrorist group or country who "presents an an imminent threat of violent attack" is NOT an "assassination," it is SELF DEFENSE.
WTF? Is this a sign that Holder has flipped?
@Raman_Ghavami
35m35 minutes ago
https://twitter.com/Raman_Ghavami
https://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/sanctions/OFAC-Enforcement/Pages/20200110.aspx
US Treasury Issues New Sanctions on Iran
Patriots should follow Raman_Ghavami on twitter as he has had major drops in recent days RE Iran including his articles at Washington Examiner being used in WH daily pressors
>This whole fucking discussion is fucking contrived. Its fucking tag team shills trying to infect anons with the idea that its okay to let the cabal fuckwits slide. Whatever this shit is it ain't organic anonnery.
I agree
Its like Trump said last night at the rally, any other person taking this job in 2016, "would be standing in a corner sucking their thumb, saying "mommy, mommy, I want to go home."
So no matter what concernfags may say, we have no valid reasons to be here weeping and sucking our thumb.
>Hold hands & stay together, frens!
>WWG1WGA
>Whistleblower comes forward with allegations that Obama communicated directly with Solemani
>Huber's investigation is still ongoing, in Durham's hands
>And anons are prepared to wait by the river as long as it takes.
>All the light, all the good will reveal. The future is bright anons. Have hope.
We are the Cyber Warriors of the NEW KNIGHTHOOD
What I find amusing is how modern NEW AGE authors writing on the subject of the Knights Templar always make the fanciful case that the Templars must have discovered some hidden Treasure or secret tech buried under Solomon’s Temple which ultimately led to their great wealth and power. But in truth, the actual history shows that the Templar’s real power came from the spiritual power found in a letter written by Bernard of Clairvaux’s titled ‘In Praise of the New Knighthood’.
Most people today, including many posting nonsense about the Templars on this board have no idea who they actually were and how epoch-defining Bernard’s letter would turn out to be. It began to circulate widely, much like we see our memes go viral today, copied repeatedly by scribes as it passed from hand to hand across Christendom. In short order, Bernard’s letter became the Order’s official press release and public mission statement.
As more and more people read Bernard’s thundering words, the Templars’ lives, and the Crusades, were changed forever.
‘IN PRAISE OF THE NEW KNIGHTHOOD’
Bernard used his letter as an opportunity to crack European military society wide open, describing how the originary knights of Europe were vain, arrogant, and godless. He came from a French knightly family himself, so knew the gory details all too well and he did not hold back. He humiliated the ordinary knights of Christendom:
“Therefore what error, knights, so immense, what frenzy so unbearable draws you to military actions at such expense and effort, all for nothing but death or crime? You cover your horses in silks and drape your armour with swatches of flowing cloths; you paint your lances, shields and saddles; you bling up your bridles and spurs with gold and silver and jewels; and with this pomp you rush only towards death, in shameful fury and shameless madness. Are these military insignia, or the trappings of women?”
When Bernard had finished slamming the narcissistic self-serving thugs of the nobility, he declared that the Templars were the antidote: the perfect incarnation of a new, true chivalry, who fought for God and not their own devilish petty squabbles [think PAYtriots].
The Templars were, he declared, what Christian knights should be. They embodied virtue and rejected the vices of the age, fighting a war that was more spiritual than physical. They were the model of humble, professional, lethal warriors:
“They are careful to avoid all excess in food and dress, being concerned only with what is necessary. … They never sit about idly or wander aimlessly, but always when (rarely) not riding out, they do not hang about eating bread, but mend and refurbish their clothes and weapons and get their kit straight … . They accept people of every rank, and defer to skill not noble blood. They vie with each other for honor; they bear each other’s burdens … . They detest dice and gaming and take no pleasure in the ridiculous and cruel custom of falconry. They abominate jesters, magicians, story-tellers, singers of scurrilous songs and jousts as so many vanities and mad deceptions. They shave their hair, knowing from the Apostle that it is shameful for a man to have flowing locks. They rarely wash and seldom tidy their hair, content to be disheveled and dusty, unkempt, covered in dust and blackened by the marks of the sun and their armour.
Cited from here
http://www.dominicselwood.com/the-knights-templar-4-st-bernard-of-clairvaux/
———————————————
Does this theme sound familiar? Remember when General Flynn said we were "an army of digital soldiers" engaged in "an insurgency, an irregular warfare at it's finest in politics?" Our spiritual struggle is bringing forth the light of Truth to the whole world.
>wizards and warlocks locked and ready
We are the Cyber Warriors of the NEW KNIGHTHOOD.
WWG1WGA
>k. anons don't like labels.
That is a fair enough criticism, so I will not post it again. Labels can be a real liability, but, do you have a problem with Gen Flynn calling us "digital soldiers" or Q calling us "PATRIOTS"?
I certainly understand the aversion to collectivism and groupthink, which are characteristics of the LEFT. But, Q is right about the need to be UNITED against those who wish to divide us. So, I have thought about this conundrum a great deal. On this note, I will leave you with what I posted here on the subject back in May 2018:
——————–
As a big fan of G. Edward Griffin's ideas on Individualism versus Collectivism, I can certainly understand how some liberty minded anons here may have had some reservations about how Q's statements promoting UNITY, Patriotism, and Nationalism. After all, all of these terms are "collectivist" in nature because they imply group conformity around a central idea. But let me provide you with an idea to think about to see if we can come together for some dialogue on this subject.
Like the age old debate in psychology and biology over the role of Nature (genes) vs Nurture (environment), we know that in the real world, the life of an organism reflects a combination of BOTH forces at work and never only involves just one or the other. And when thinking about wave/particle duality in Physics, when can conceptualize an electron as a discrete "particle", but also as part of a wave function where it can affect the movement of other electrons in an interference pattern.
So my own thinking about collectivism has evolved in recent years to where I now believe that "collectivism" is actually desirable and necessary so long as groups are allowed to nucleate and extinguish themselves from the level of the individual (bottom up) as opposed to being artificially created and maintained from a centralized authority (top down). Paraphrasing Q, "There is no bigger threat to a 'centralized authority' (eg the State) than the public being awake and thinking for themselves."
When I read those words from Q, I was reminded of these words from Leo Tolstoy, "…it is that unconquerable force which constitutes real genuine public opinion - that spirit of Truth while itself advancing that moves all humanity.
The State knows this, and trembles before this force, and strives through its envy in every way it can to counteract or become possessed of it. They know that strength is not in force, but in the action of the mind, and in its clear expression, and, therefore, they are more afraid of the expression of independent thought than of armies; hence they institute censorship, bribe the media, and monopolize the control of religion, science, and education.
But this spiritual force which moves the world eludes them; it is neither in books nor in papers; it cannot be trapped, and is always free; it is in the depths of consciousness of each individual. The most powerful force of freedom which cannot be imprisoned is that which asserts itself in the soul of an individual when s/he is alone, in silence, and then naturally communicates his/her thoughts to a spouse, sibling, or friend; those from whom s/he would regard it as dishonest to conceal the Truth."
So, I would say as long as we have the freedom to speak (1st amendment) in order to have constructive dialogue with one another and the ability to protect ourselves (2nd amendment) from "mob rule run a muck” then we should not worry so much about coming together UNITED under the banner of Liberty and TRUTH, regardless of our diverse individual differences. After all, is that not preciously what our founders did in order to stand up against the tyranny of the "globalist" British Empire?
————
now off to work