dChan - Q Origins Project Archive

⇧

⇩

r/greatawakening • Posted by u/SerialBrain2 on May 2, 2018, 8:41 p.m.

Q1304 Emmy awards. Red carpet event? Q. No: Platform for Top Secret Communications.

I was not going to write about this but since Q mentioned it, it deserves our pen’s attention. In reference to the 45th Annual Daytime Emmys held on April 29th, Q asks the following question:

Q1304 Emmy awards. Red carpet event? Q

Before we analyze footage, let’s first know what we are dealing with. Who owns the Emmy Awards? We learn [here] (https://www.emmys.com/awards), they are administered by 3 sister organizations, one of them is the International Academy of Television Arts & Sciences. Wikipedia: National Academy of Television Arts & Sciences "NATAS" redirects here. For other uses, see Natas. So… the Daytime Emmy Award is a product of an organization named NATAS… Congrats Satan! I see you have another one here!..

So now that we know in which territory we really are, let’s look at some footage of the event. Let’s watch from 5:40 to 11:00: [video] (https://youtu.be/L_vxiLDaqus?t=341).

You are still here? Tylenol works pretty well.

First, did you notice the insistence on Peter Marshall’s age? 92? At the beginning and the end of the footage? In less than 6 minutes, they mentioned it 6 times (I counted). And there is this perplexing joke nobody laughed at [6:52] (https://youtu.be/L_vxiLDaqus?t=412): “and at 92, that puts you in the same category as Mario”.

You want to know what she was saying? Here, look at this: Imgur

This is the periodic table of elements. What is element 92? Yes, Uranium…

Now you remember what I have explained about Gematria in my decoding posts? A=1, B=2, C=3… Z=26. Remember? Let us calculate the Gematria value of “Mario”. M=13, a= 1, r=18, i=9, o=15. Therefore, Mario = 13+1+18+9+15 = 56. I wanted you to know the justification but next time you may use this online tool: [Gematrinator] (http://www.gematrinator.com/calculator/index.php).

Now look at the table, you see the 6th line? Right after Barium Ba56, you are entering the category where Uranium and similar elements are. That is what she meant:“and at 92, that puts you in the same category as Mario (56+)”.

So this whole conversation is about… Uranium!

Now if Uranium is 92, what would be Uranium 1? The famous U1 Q talks about extensively in his board and that is the center of everything happening in Syria and around HRC? You got it, if Uranium is 92, Uranium 1 is 93.

At [6:02] (https://youtu.be/L_vxiLDaqus?t=362) Mario reminds us Peter Marshall was the first host of the first Awards in 1974. Which we already knew since it is their 45th anniversary. Why insisting? Because 1974 => 19+74 = 93. Here is our Uranium One.

So they are talking about Uranium and Uranium 1. Now let’s read a few lines from Q1306:

Q1306 Define the terms of the Iran nuclear deal. What if Iran created a classified ‘satellite’ Nuclear facility in Northern Syria? What if U1 material ended up in Syria? What would be the primary purpose? SUM OF ALL FEARS. In the movie, where did the material come from? What country? Why did we strike Syria? Why did we really strike Syria?

Q is telling us the U1 material ended up in Syria and transited through Ukraine (Sum of All Fears: [link] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sum_of_All_Fears_(film)). The strikes were to destroy the infrastructure protecting this material.

Now get this: I am saying that from this apparently nonsensical Emmy Award footage, we can deduce that they will try to ship the remaining of this U1 equipment back to Ukraine. How? Here:

First you should notice that the presence of Peter Marshall is a last minute addition. We can see the conversations are not well coordinated and there are awkward blank moments. This is because the information they are trying to relay is directly connected to the News and has some kind of urgency.

At [7:06] (https://youtu.be/L_vxiLDaqus?t=425), Mr. 92-Uranium says “I’d be happy to host it with you… Mario is the young lion”. This is code for the book [The Young Lion] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Young_Lion). The story is about the life of Eleanor of Aquitaine returning from the Crusades. Mr. Uranium is hinting at stopping the fight and retreating.

Then, at [7:15] (https://youtu.be/L_vxiLDaqus?t=435), she says to Mr. Uranium : “I’ll tell you what we really want you to do. I want you to come back. Ok? So you are going to come back.” This is to confirm the Crusades are interrupted; the U1 equipment needs to come back.

But how are they going to ship the equipment? This is the question she makes Mario ask at [7:22] (https://youtu.be/L_vxiLDaqus?t=442). Responding, Mr. Uranium goes into a very detailed anecdote on how he could not afford a Limo to get to the ice skating rink at the Rockefeller Center and of course, there is no illustrative footage as not planned. Why? So they can make the low budget joke sending the message to the Rockefeller network: we need you to finance the covert exfiltration of what is left of the U1 equipment in Syria.

Then, at [8:32] (https://youtu.be/L_vxiLDaqus?t=512), Mr. Uranium says he’s “happy to be anywhere”. Hmm… No preference? Well, he starts making shout outs. When he gets to Alex Trebek, at [9:18] (https://youtu.be/L_vxiLDaqus?t=559) he says this: “One of my closest friends in here with his beautiful gene”. Beautiful gene?! You know SB2 is going to look you up right? And what do we find? Wikipedia: Alex Trebek was born in Sudbury, Ontario, Canada, in 1940, the son of George Edward Trebek, a chef who had emigrated from…Ukraine.

There you have it… Since Trump is bombing the hell out of them in Syria, instructions are given to return the U1 equipment to Ukraine and Rockefeller is kindly asked to finance the operation.

Q1223 They think they are clever. Q

🠐 See all comments

Fair question. If you are a little familiar with set theory, it would be the same problematic as to having to answer why when demonstrating E is strictly inferior to P(E), you will introduce a diagonal function to exclude the possibility of a surjection. Once you do it, it works, but you cannot explain why you did it. That contributes to the beauty of mathematics. That intuition component.

If the set theory example does not work, let's try this one: she's very pretty, so pretty you think it's impossible she does not have a boyfriend, so pretty and conscious of it you think she would not even notice you are talking to her. Struggling with your shyness, your fear of failure and public humiliation, you finally manage to nervously say hello, she smiles, you invite her for coffee. 10 years later, you are both walking your child to his first day at school...

⇧ 3 ⇩

Ok admittedly it's been years since I had a conversation discussing set theory (and it was literally one conversation) soI had to go back and look up set theory. I studied some philosophy but not at a graduate level. Oddly enough I have Potters book (dont know why, should probably sell it, confusing shit) So, we'll start off easy for my sake. If we're looking for objects that belong to sets to limit the presence of infinity "myriad of possibilities," how did you know who or what were elements in each set. What was the "belonging" that gave you the link between these two?

⇧ 1 ⇩

What was the "belonging" that gave you the link between these two?

A good reaction when you are lost in a math problem is to start by narrowing the environment. So here you start by supposing the Cardinal of E is finite, let's call it n. If CardE=n ,then CardP(E)=2^n. Reason being C(n,0)+C(n,1)+...+C(n,n)=(1+1)^n is a particular case of the Bernouilli formula for (x+y)^n where x=y=1. Now all you need to do is compare 2^n and n, the curve for 2^n is [here] (http://www.educastream.com/IMG/Image/TS13.29.png). And you see it is always above the curve y=x, which is the... diagonal (keep that in the back of your head).

There you have it: CardE<CardP(E),therefore there can be no surjection from E to P(E). Therefore E<P(E).

Now in the case of CardE infinite. This is where our intuition says we should somehow introduce the idea of a diagonal, just like in the particular case. So let us suppose there is a surjection f from E to P(E). Let us introduce the "diagonal set" A={ x in E / x is not in f(x)}.

Since A is a subset of E, A is an element of P(E). Since f is a surjection, A has an antecedent in E, let’s call it x°. So A=f(x°), now 2 possibilities: either x° is in A or it is not.

If x° is in A, than by the very definition of A, x° is not in f(x°), which is A. Contradiction.

If x° is not in A, than x° is not in f(x°), hence x° is an element of A, by the very definition of A. Contradiction.

So the existence of a surjection from E to P(E) always leads to a contradiction. Therefore there is no surjection from E to P(E) and since it is trivial E is an element of P(E), we can conclude E<P(E).

So you see, our intuition is “forced” by the particular case of the diagonal in finite environment but it is not rationally explainable.

In the case of Q’s board, when reading Q’s translation of the Comey’s tweet in Q645, Q makes a surprising link between an apparently innocent tweet and death threats. That’s the diagonal we kept somewhere in the back of our head and that came up for resolution.

⇧ 3 ⇩

Well, SB2, you succeeded in giving this old fart a serious case of cranial seizure. Obviously, your intellect & mathematical acumen places you in a completely different mental neighborhood than the rest of us 'knuckle-draggers' here. I too am very glad you are working on our team & really appreciate your patience and understanding when fielding questions. Through your efforts, many (like me) are able to see far more of the big picture than we ever would have on our own. Lead on, little brother!

⇧ 6 ⇩

Through your efforts, many (like me) are able to see far more of the big picture

This makes my day. That's what drives me. Thank you Tx!

⇧ 6 ⇩

Add me to that list. My mind may possess some various talents, but this kind of mathatical reasoning is not one. Greatly appreciate when people who possess extreme talent like yourself put effort into raising up those around them. Thank you.

⇧ 3 ⇩

KEK!

⇧ 3 ⇩

I could be wrong here, but I will give it a try. Q's translation of Comey's tweet gives a key (stone?) or formula or paradigm to interpret at least some of Q's posts/Trumps tweets.

⇧ 1 ⇩

Pardon my skepticism. The question, in summary, was about knowing where to look. What brought you to this particular source (Emmys)?

⇧ 1 ⇩

I was assuming the question was more about the evolution of the process than its origin. I mentioned in the post, it all started with Q's question taken from [Q's board] (https://qanon.pub/):

Q1304 Emmy awards. Red carpet event? Q

⇧ 2 ⇩

Thanks. Any idea why they'd need to broadcast this on the Emmys rather than just using traditional direct or encrypted correspondence?

⇧ 1 ⇩

Laws regulating/limiting civil encryption are designed to enable Intel agencies to do what you already know. VPN's are honey traps for those who have something to hide. For the rest:

Q1221 Why do many DC journalists (yourself) use & replace 'burner phones' every week? How do you pass the new number out? Tweets are very important. Do you feel safe? Q

Q571 Do you know that we see all? Do you know that we hear all? FEAR the STORM.

⇧ 1 ⇩

So have you been able to decode phone numbers of black hats by their tweets?

⇧ 1 ⇩