Anonymous ID: b2d3c8 April 29, 2020, 7:04 p.m. No.8967941   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>7991

>>8967860

 

 

>>8967860

>https://aapsonline.org/aaps-letter-asking-gov-ducey-to-rescind-executive-order-concerning-hydroxychloroquine-in-covid-19/

Thanks anon. My browser stopped updating and anon fell behind, had to restart some stuff.

Anonymous ID: b2d3c8 April 29, 2020, 7:14 p.m. No.8968040   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>8051 >>8189

>>8967983

Question.

Why did you say the senses are all homonyms?

See - sea

Hear - here

——————

Taste - taste

Smell - smell

Touch - touch

 

The first two are not too much like the others. Choose one from column A and won from Column B? I do not understand what point you were trying to make. What good is making a point if nobody Heres it?

Please anon.

 

Why → Who Y

 

Maybe if I talk cryptic to you, something better will habben.

Anonymous ID: b2d3c8 April 29, 2020, 7:30 p.m. No.8968186   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>8274

>>8967793

That's weird. >>8783795 PB talked about the Invisible Enemy's order of battle and the Army of God's OOB.

 

They also mentioned it in >>8754365 PB:

What is an order of battle?

An important tool used by MI to analyze enemy capacity for combat?

Have anons instituted the staff procedure of maintaining accurate information about the composition of your enemy's order of battle?

Partial/CORPOR/flesh and blood (only) or COMPLETE OOB?

Does this OOB also map out the hierarchical organization, command structure, strength, disposition of personnel and equipment of units and formations of the [NONCORPOR] armed forces of your master enemy?

Do anons truly grasp what it means to have [NONCORPOR] enemies?

 

I'm not sure where we're going with this, because every time we try to nail down a firm answer, we get a baffling/inconclusive reply.

If the Invisible Enemy is a noncorporeal enemy or partly so, that means spiritual weapons will be used to defeat them.

Do we have spiritual weapons? We have prayer. Some anons may have some other tools at their disposal that might also serve in this fashion.

Apparently we have help from HIGHER powers.

Anonymous ID: b2d3c8 April 29, 2020, 7:41 p.m. No.8968307   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>8519

>>8968190

Anons he is partly decoding the prior coded drops to show anons how it's done. Each 4-letter group turns into 2 letters.

 

It's signed T.

Do we know anybody with a surname T?

There have been many posts signed

t.

that anon suspected were him.

 

Did anybody retain the past few drops that were encoded in this fashion?

 

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA v. HELLER No 07 29 0?????? etc.

easily found in Wikipedia:

 

District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), is a landmark case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to keep and bear arms, unconnected with service in a militia, for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home, and that the District of Columbia's handgun ban and requirement that lawfully owned rifles and shotguns be kept "unloaded and disassembled or bound by a trigger lock" violated this guarantee.[1] It also stated that the right to bear arms is not unlimited and that guns and gun ownership would continue to be regulated. It was the first Supreme Court case to decide whether the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms for self-defense or if the right was intended for state militias.[2]

 

Because of the District of Columbia's status as a federal enclave (it is not in any state), the decision did not address the question of whether the Second Amendment's protections are incorporated by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment against the states.[3] This point was addressed two years later by McDonald v. City of Chicago (2010), in which it was found that they are.

 

On June 26, 2008, the Supreme Court affirmed by a vote of 5 to 4 the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in Heller v. District of Columbia.[4][5] The Supreme Court struck down provisions of the Firearms Control Regulations Act of 1975 as unconstitutional, determined that handguns are "arms" for the purposes of the Second Amendment, found that the Regulations Act was an unconstitutional ban, and struck down the portion of the Regulations Act that requires all firearms including rifles and shotguns be kept "unloaded and disassembled or bound by a trigger lock". Prior to this decision the Firearms Control Regulation Act of 1975 also restricted residents from owning handguns except for those registered prior to 1975. …

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_v._Heller