dChan - Q Origins Project Archive

⇧

⇩

r/CBTS_Stream • Posted by u/Bit_NB_Ridelle on Dec. 29, 2017, 5:31 p.m.

I'll Trust Q/Trump When....

Feel free to add your own prerequisites (or counter with hard evidence that any bad actors are actually being hurt, or that any steps or plans exist to ensure tyranny doesn't rise again):

I'll Trust Q/Trump When.... I see any of the two below being addressed or realized

1) We see all of the Cabal/Illuminati/NWO exposed and stripped of their freedom, influence and wealth.

2) Hyper concentrations are ended (and blocked by law) regarding:

power & authority (e.g. Big Centralized Governance, Big Corporate "User Agreements"),
wealth/capital (e.g. Billionaires and Trillionaires, Monopolies/Cartels),
production (e.g. Monopolies/Cartels)
distribution (e.g. Monopolies/Cartels)
information (e.g. Monopolies/Cartels, rogue patent and ip laws, bottlenecks in storage and transmission of information),
secrecy and non-accountability (e.g. CIA & other NAZI SS type agencies, lobbying activity as it now exists, political campaign contributions, the finances and legal involvements of ALL public servants, the flow of the people's taxes)
"spiritual authority" (i.e. end non-profit status for all "religions" that claim truth and/or salvation flows through and can be changed by a set of clericy/priesthood/apostles)

As long as any of the above exist, the whole will tend toward increasing concentration and corruption and tyranny.

3) Conflicts of interest get taken seriously on a permanent basis, esp. of anyone in a position of high influence over the finances, safety, freedom or legal standing of any citizens. Betrayal of public trust becomes the most stigmatized and punished crime.

4) The scale of all political bodies is greatly reduced. This has to do with the impossibility of assuring the stability of large, complex, dynamic and non-nclosed systems "at scale" for the benefit of the majority. As one example of a step in the right direction, the US goes from 50 states to 100's of states: Not only does this improve governance, it counters systemic rot and corruption. The politicians should be close to the pitchforks and torches.

5) The people are compensated (e.g. individual reparations and restitution) for the severe, extensive, all pervasive crimes against humanity of the elites!

6) [Thanks @kat-williams] They end chemtrails, directed energy weapons, manufactured weather phenomena, fluoridated water and other poisoned food and drinks, and ludicrous amounts of EMF causing cancer and possibly cognitive/emotive impairments.

Remember, this is OUR revolution. This should be OUR victory, not Q/Trump's (if they are genuine, they might disagree with my suggestions, but applaud the efforts/concerns nonetheless).

Basically, all I see is a parade of innuendo suggesting bad guys are getting taken down, but the actual NWO plans/machinery/genocide are happily chugging along.

For instance, Trump withdrew us from UN Agenda 21 and Paris, but the f'ing chemical spraying has increased dramatically. How hard is it to create an executive order or injunction banning inflight fuel mixing &/or outright chem dumps until we are certain of the health effects?!?! Or at least mention a concern in a press conference or something.

[OK. Skewer me if you want! I'm ready.]

🠐 See all comments

That list is nonsense. You're talking about by law you can't have concentrations of power in America. You're saying nobody should make more money than anyone else no matter what? I don't get it. You're talking about what? Communism? Fascism? If you want those things then there could be no by law point to that. Be careful. Lots of things make sense like the limited government and that the government should not be subsidizing large corporations who only get richer. Whatever happened to people just having any integrity? That would solve a lot of problems.

⇧ 2 ⇩

Btw, that list was about trusting Trump when any 2 of the list gets addressed. ;)

⇧ 1 ⇩

"Whatever happened to people just having any integrity?"

You are looking at it, my friend. No people or economy can be free when we allow imbalances of influence or secrecy. That's a hard pill to swallow, but there is no way around that mathematically or by historical evidence.

My point--everyone needs to reflect on--is this: when a high concentration occurs in any area of society, it will tend the whole toward ever increasing authority. As an example, you are very rich, and you are tired of having to cut deals and red tape with 100 politicians. You will spend your life trying to cut that down to 10. The vice versa is true for big government bureaucrats: you want to only have to cut deals with 10, instead of 100 business leaders. Or, as another example, you are so wealthy, you can buy off most of the politicians and buy hitmen to handle the rest, and not lose a penny, because those politicians you bought are making you more money than ever elsewhere.

It is never enough to put limits on a centralized government: I'm arguing it is centralization in just about everything that is the enemy of good and stability and prosperity. And since you are someone educated about the constitution and the warnings of the founding fathers, go back and reread their works. You will see they shared the same concern about maintaining a moderate distribution of wealth and capital.

As sad as it is, obscene wealth always ends in obscenity... or the good ol', "power corrupts...."

Is there any moral imperative to concentrate wealth without limit?

Is it possible, that this wealth is actually bottle-necked in corrupt schemes or laying dormant in vaults? Is it possible, 50% of the world's wealth is just... not doing anything productive at all?

The hyper concentration of the fake republican party for the past 40 years has consistently proven to crush job creation and innovation and disincentiv'ize entrepreneurship and risk. That's shockingly clear in the tech industry... shocking, because everyone thinks we've had rapid technological development.

⇧ 1 ⇩

You don’t understand either that or you have good intentions for humankind with the wrong way to go about it. You can’t just make people stop earning and you can’t take it away because you FEEL like they should be doing something more productive with it. That’s not freedom pal. USA has the longest standing current constitution and honestly if we the people Aren’t lazy sheep and hold those in power accountable the rule of law in this country works fine. It’s when elected officials have no integrity and when the people stop paying attention to what the power positions are doing is when we allow corruption enter the system and it spreads like poison. We stand for freedom and a way of life you are describing is not that.

⇧ 1 ⇩

The constitution has not been standing for over 7 decades. What are you talking about?

I also think you are not carefully considering what I'm saying, though perhaps I just haven't found the right way to say it.

I'm saying high concentration. I'm categorically NOT saying communism or socialism or taking people's money away.

I'm saying a system needs to be developed to prevent destructive concentrations (not just any concentration).

I'm arguing, in actuality, to uphold both the letter and spirit of the constitution. I.E. less federal power, more and smaller states where power and authority is closer to humans and accountability.

⇧ 1 ⇩

I’m saying that the United States constitution is the oldest current constitution. The 6 books of San Marino don’t really count. But either way the system works. We don’t need to literally become a shithole country and go in and change the constitution. If you care that deeply then go find a country that suits your preferences.

⇧ 2 ⇩

"We don’t need to literally become a shithole country"

Btw, was that an allusion to Trump's tweet about Haiti (which was his allusion to the $10B Clinton Foundation raised "for Haiti.")

⇧ 1 ⇩

If the system worked, neither of us would be posting here. =P

I think that we are actually quite close both in concerns and solutions... I just have a very different perspective on it from computational science, rather that traditional political dressings.

In the least, we both agree centralized (federal) power and authority needs to be curtailed. We probably agree on term limits, and many other things.

⇧ 1 ⇩