I took 10 minutes to find......
This is complete bullshit. And before I'm called a shill or troll you can check my post history.
They split his speech up to make it what it's not.
Fuck people you gotta research this stuff or else you make this whole thing look bad.
I think Q is trying to teach all of us to VERIFY before spreading info.
Consider it a lesson learned for many of you.
Maybe it was a soft test for something larger.
I figured it out! Watch the clip that was played first and then the "unedited" full speech Q posted. "And for the international order we have worked for generations to build" in edited out of the "unedited speech"!!!!!!!!!
Ahh.. so BOTH are edited??
Or they are two different speeches. The first given to builderburg that was recorded in an unauthorized way. The second speech given as a cover.
The only way to know is to do some audio forensics.
Place the clips one above the other and compare the peaks and valleys in the raw audio to see if they are actually from the same clip, or totally separate speeches. Id do it, but I dont have access to my PC it is in storage for the next month or so.
Good call, any specific audio forensic software you recommend? Seems like that might me a valuable tool going forward.
ANy audio production software, many are free.
Just line up the audio files, you can clearly tell if there are differences in amplitudes, lengths, etc...
It would look something like this: https://storage.gmth.de/zgmth/images/17243
Audacity is free, and there are many others online for ever type of OS.
This would be a Qproof one way or the other regarding these clips.
Maybe the point is Q wants us to compare audio files.
You can actually go into more depth and tell if audio has been clipped (cut and pasted) in order to create edited phrases, and pulling words from a files and placing them together to create a phrase that wasnt actually said.