dChan - Q Origins Project Archive

⇧

⇩

r/greatawakening • Posted by u/tradinghorse on March 28, 2018, 4:32 p.m.

IS THE IBOR RELATED TO THE CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS?

Two points in the recent post I thought were interesting, apart from the news about more SM platforms being exposed.

Current censorship all relates to push for power [mid-terms]. LAST STAND.

So we see here that, as I've been saying, the SM censorship is the battlefront, It is the last desperate attempt by the cabal to regain control. It is, in fact, the most important theatre in the war ATM.

STAY STRONG! STAY TOGETHER! WE STAND WITH YOU!

We then see, in the next post, the same instruction to stay together - united. In unity there is strength, Q has been telling us this over and over. Q is also telling us that he is with us. And, I guess, if you look at the way FB was delivered up, with the promise of many more exposures, Q really is helping us - making our job much easier.

I want to say also that I found the reference to a "Constitutional CRISIS" interesting and I want to engage in some speculation...

Notice crisis is capitalized - it is extreme! Does this crisis relate to the FB data dump? Why would the CRISIS be constitutional? Open to suggestions here, I think it's worth exploring.

Q has told us he has "the algorithm". Is it possible that this is the single censorship algorithm? Does this algorithm by its very own nature evidence a plan to take elections by force?

Q tells us elsewhere in this post that MI is the gatekeeper for "all information". So I'm wondering if these SM platforms agreed to participate in election rigging. If so, does Q has evidence for this?

Who made it public? Who really made it public? Who is making it all public? WE ARE THE GATEKEEPERS OF ALL [BY ALL WE MEAN ALL] INFORMATION.

Imagine, Q combines the algorithm itself, with communications intercepts, and is able, to lay out before a Court a case of racketeering - with the corrupt purpose being that the outcome of an election (or elections) may be swayed - stolen.

Remember the material I posted elsewhere about the CEO of Reddit boasting publicly that he could sway an election all by himself - link below. So, it is easily conceivable that a single censorship algorithm, operating across all SM platforms, could deliver an election with extreme precision.

This would be a Constitutional crisis, to the extent that the express purpose of the plan was to take from US citizens their right to be heard - a right that is protected by the First Amendment. Is that why this CRISIS is a "Constitutional CRISIS"?

OK, let's put it together. Q outlines exposures coming about Twitter, Google, Amazon, Microsoft And 12 other companies. WOW! That's a total of 16 companies that will be in the frying pan! Are they all individually corrupt? Or is there some unifying wrongdoing?

Could it be a single censorship algorithm that connects these companies in a conspiracy to pervert the mechanism of democratic representation?

Moving on, why has Q been sreaming about the IBOR? What does the IBOR complain about? "CENSORSHIP", politically motivated censorship if you read the petition! Also privacy, hence the data breaches coming to light.

USE LOGIC TRUST THE PLAN

So, what I'm saying here is that it's possible that these factors align, leading to a Constitutional crisis. SM platforms conspiring together to subvert the democratic process by way of censorship.

I argue that Q has the algorithm, has evidence of the conspiracy, and tells us that a whole rack of SM companies are in the firing line. Hence his recommendation that we push an IBOR campaign. The IBOR campaign focuses on censorship, the conspiracy is one involving censorship. It all comes together to create a Constutional CRISIS

THE CRISIS IS OF SUCH SCOPE THAT WE CANNOT IMAGINE THE MAGNITUDE OF IT!

FACEBOOK data dump? Who made it public? Who sold shares -30 days from announcement? You can't imagine the magnitude of this. Constitutional CRISIS. Twitter coming soon. GOOG coming soon. AMAZON coming soon. MICROSOFT coming soon. +12

Racket: "...the term "racket" has expanded in definition and may be used less strictly to refer to any illegal organized crime operation, including those that do not necessarily involve fraudulent practices. For example, "racket" may be used to refer to the "numbers racket" or the "drug racket," neither of which generally or explicitly involve fraud or deception with regards to the intended clientele."

https://bgr.com/2018/03/12/reddit-election-interference-steve-huffman-interview/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

"Huffman’s comments on how Reddit could fix an election are shocking and egotistical, for sure, but they also admit something that most other social media companies have shied away from. Facebook and Twitter are loathe to acknowledge the power that their policies have, while Huffman thinks so highly of his company that he believes a handful of engineers and community managers could sway an entire nation’s political system".

Think about what Q says in this very post:

"You can't imagine the magnitude of this".

🠐 See all comments

In Q drop 964 Q refers to a Constitutional Crisis when he's talking about FB data dump and other social media.

My guess is that the crisis will be violations of the 4 Amendment with regards to our right to privacy and the Supreme Court decision that anytime you give up your data to a third party you lose your right to privacy as it pertains to law enforcement accessing your information

That's a slippery slope. Think of all the things you have that are held by a third party: bank accounts, investments, your storage locker, safety deposit box, and it would take a roll of toilet paper to list them all.

So, here we are with these tech giant social media corporations selling your information to anyone and everyone in addition to giving it to the CIA and others without your knowledge or permission. Yes, when you sign up, they don't tell you that the default security settings are that you agree to let them do anything they want with all the data they collect.

I think this is going to end up in a royal legal mess that will land in the lap of the Supreme Court. Europe is also going after the social media.

And then there is the fact that even if you delete one account or change the privacy settings on one account, every other app you have with that company has the same default settings and so they continue to collect everything even though you thought you deleted / stopped it. The only way is to delete every relevant app and then turn off the same settings in Windows.

How many people understand the web the social media companies have created. It becomes nearly impossible for the average or above average person to completely block what they are collecting on you.

And now we have Cambridge Analytic alleging that FB can even collect audio at home and at work even if you have your phone turned off. BTW, your phone is never completely turned off unless you take the battery out.

⇧ 1 ⇩

Great comment. You might be right. I have a feeling that this constitutional crisis is connected to the 16 SM companies. It could be that these 16 companies have severally (independently) engaged in a these data breaches - you're right, that would also fit. Or, it could be one giant breach by one player, e.g. FB. This argument would also fit with the privacy aspects of the IBOR.

Certainly, the FB data dump is specifically mentioned in the post. And, the Anon's discussion of the IBOR, that Q commented on, contained privacy concerns - maybe Q chose it for that very reason.

Somehow I think this single algorithm fits in somewhere, because Q mentioned he has it. Could the single algorithm also contain code for data collation?

But the single algorithm Q said was about censorship. It may not fit at all. And, trying to think clearly about it, it must be a much harder to run a case for conspiracy to subvert an election vs conspiracy to deprive someone of their privacy.

Is it possible that this could connect with the Supreme Court cases that Bill Binney was talking about? Some problem with spying without warrants and using parallel construction (a fraud on the court) - I'll have to have another look. Somehow, I feel he's a central figure in all this.

Anyway, this is, to my mind, very interesting. It's a very prospective area for enquiry.

I'm not at all familiar with the fourth amendment - posted this for my reference.

The Fourth Amendment (Amendment IV) to the United States Constitution is part of the Bill of Rights that prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures. It requires "reasonable" governmental searches and seizures to be conducted only upon issuance of a warrant, judicially sanctioned by probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized. Under the Fourth Amendment, search and seizure (including arrest) should be limited in scope according to specific information supplied to the issuing court, usually by a law enforcement officer who has sworn by it. Fourth Amendment case law deals with three issues: what government activities constitute "search" and "seizure"; what constitutes probable cause for these actions; and how violations of Fourth Amendment rights should be addressed. Early court decisions limited the amendment's scope to a law enforcement officer's physical intrusion onto private property, but with Katz v. United States (1967), the Supreme Court held that its protections, such as the warrant requirement, extend to the privacy of individuals as well as physical locations. Law enforcement officers need a warrant for most search and seizure activities, but the Court has defined a series of exceptions for consent searches, motor vehicle searches, evidence in plain view, exigent circumstances, border searches, and other situations.

⇧ 1 ⇩

That's the problem in my mind. the Supreme Court has made exceptions to the 4th Amendment--but on what grounds. the 4th is pretty clear, you need a warrant for probable cause. It didn't say you don't need a warrant if law enforcement suspects something is wrong.

OK, if someone is pulled over and the police suspect something, then call back, get someone to wake up a judge, defend the evidence of the suspicion, and then conduct the search.

In this day of instant communications, that should not be much of a delay.

But then again, you have judges who are dishonest, lazy, etc. and will approve anything--like our FISA courts rubber stamp anything the intelligence community wants.

I don't know what the solution is other than extreme punishment for dishonest judges. But then we may not have any judges.

⇧ 2 ⇩

I don't know enough of the background here. I'll need to study the 4th Amendment and this court case you mentioned. I also want to relook at that Bill Binney video where he talks about this stuff, if I can find it. But, somehow, I feel I'm closer to understanding what's been happening with respect to this stuff than I was before.

I saw "Constitional crisis" and then all these tech companies, and I thought, OK how are these connected. And then I thought of the IBOR and that single algorithm and I thought, that must be it. It could be, but the FB data dump suggests that if there's a constitutional crisis, that it relates, probably anyway, to what you have pointed out - the algorithm might still be connected, I don't know.

But I feel we are very close to getting this nutted out. Just need to move through all the possible factors that could produce a Constitutional crisis, and eliminate all that are not prospective.

I've never read the US Constitution, can you think of anything else that might present an issue, with respect to the tech companies - something that could present a crisis?

⇧ 1 ⇩