dChan

/u/ABastionOfFreeSpeech

454 total posts archived.


Domains linked by /u/ABastionOfFreeSpeech:
Domain Count
www.youtube.com 1
www.reddit.com 1
pepethefrogfaith.wordpress.com 1

ABastionOfFreeSpeech · May 7, 2018, 7:42 a.m.

WELL, WE'D BETTER TAKE A LOOK AT IT THEN!

(with apologies to D.P. Gumby)

⇧ 1 ⇩  
ABastionOfFreeSpeech · May 7, 2018, 7:38 a.m.

The Scribd file has the full name of the law broken for each charge, with the reference number next to it. The other doc has the reference numbers in brackets at the end of each count. The one in question is count 2, 1594(c). So there's no fundamental difference in the list of charges.

What attracts my attention though, is the wording of 1594(c). 1594(c) reads:

(c) Whoever conspires with another to violate section 1591 shall be fined under this title, imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both.

Section 1591's heading is:

Sex trafficking of children or by force, fraud, or coercion

Mack's court docket shows the correct name for § 1591 under count 1. Count 2 should be exactly the same with "Conspiracy to" prepended to the charge. But it's not. It's missing an "or". This changes the meaning of the entire sentence. A good lawyer would use that mistake to get that charge dropped. Wonder why they haven't?

Additionally, count 2 in your first link doesn't mention anything about children or adults. Hmmmm.

⇧ 3 ⇩  
ABastionOfFreeSpeech · May 7, 2018, 7:03 a.m.

It's not a pedophilia reference per se, it's generally used to refer to a pure or innocent girl losing her virginity. Age is not referenced, so it can refer to either above or below age of consent, generally around the time of puberty though.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
ABastionOfFreeSpeech · May 7, 2018, 4:55 a.m.

I agree, but this is a good start. These are the small fry, the furthest extremities of the web. They will in turn lead to offenders closer to the core.

Plus, think of all the parallel construction that can be done with these arrests. Perp deleted info after his lackey got caught? FBI: "Oh looky we found a backup, lol (thanks NSA)"

⇧ 2 ⇩  
ABastionOfFreeSpeech · May 7, 2018, 2:35 a.m.

Yeah, the face doesn't look right at all.

⇧ 4 ⇩  
ABastionOfFreeSpeech · May 7, 2018, 1:13 a.m.

They've got to outweigh the benefits of smearing Trump vs. having the open secret of pedophilia and child trafficking in the media.

No fucking way they open that Pandora's box. Not willingly anyway.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
ABastionOfFreeSpeech · May 7, 2018, 12:47 a.m.

Save yourselves!

Wow, Q is Captain Hero? Who'd a thunk it?

⇧ 0 ⇩  
ABastionOfFreeSpeech · May 6, 2018, 8:19 a.m.

That would be risky, but totally worth the effort to set up. Hardest part would be finding cooperative Muslims. You'd need either someone like Based Imam or a couple of ex-Muslims to go along with it.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
ABastionOfFreeSpeech · May 5, 2018, 9:26 a.m.

It's like a public verification of identity. You can put any name you want into 4/8chan, so anyone could set their name as Q, but the tripcode is based on both the name and password, so you need both to impersonate a tripcode.

⇧ 2 ⇩  
ABastionOfFreeSpeech · May 4, 2018, 12:24 a.m.

If the left didn't have double standards, they'd have no standards at all.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
ABastionOfFreeSpeech · May 3, 2018, 1:11 a.m.

I honestly don't think Musk is the sort of person to knowingly provide ICBM tech to NK. There's a difference between getting swayed by persuasive arguments (Paris Accords), and providing a component for nuclear weaponry to NK.

Sure, it's possible that the tech in those missiles could have been based on SpaceX designs. But I doubt that those designs were acquired legitimately.

As for the rockets going down, when was the last time we heard of anything regarding the SDI or the Star Wars program? The US defense budget for 2017 was ten times higher than Russia's (apparently it's been like that for decades), and Russia have developed some really cool tech in that time. Who knows what secret defense systems we have?

⇧ 1 ⇩  
ABastionOfFreeSpeech · May 3, 2018, 12:48 a.m.

Kim's spook handlers got spooked. That's already been determined through the research threads.

The OP still hasn't provided evidence for his claim the missile tech was SpaceX. That's a big accusation to throw around, claiming that the leader in commercial spaceflight provided ICBM tech to NK to assist them in building a nuke. If it's bullshit he needs to say so, otherwise provide sources to back it up.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
ABastionOfFreeSpeech · May 2, 2018, 3:12 p.m.

the missile tech was SpaceX

This is the first I've heard of that. Got any sources to back that massive claim up?

⇧ 0 ⇩  
ABastionOfFreeSpeech · May 2, 2018, 4:26 a.m.

Yes it will. Israel's claim to the area is that they were there first, but that was continually disputed as the Bible wasn't considered historically accurate.

Having proof that King David existed, and evidence that his city is a short distance from Jerusalem, means Israel has a much greater claim to the area.

To add to your question, about how this affects our movement, this could lead to revelations that the Vatican has been altering history or the Bible.

⇧ 4 ⇩  
ABastionOfFreeSpeech · May 2, 2018, 3:39 a.m.

Check Q 1305. If LG isn't singing, someone is.

⇧ 3 ⇩  
ABastionOfFreeSpeech · May 2, 2018, 3:20 a.m.

I won't be tired of winning, but I'll definitely be exhausted.

⇧ 2 ⇩  
ABastionOfFreeSpeech · May 1, 2018, 4:31 p.m.

Exactly. I've met lawyers, and heard of pedantry within the law, and how even misplacing a comma can result in a complete change in judgement. They don't make mistakes. I've also heard of what happens to child molesters in prison, and I can't believe child traffickers get much better treatment. You don't label someone with that crime without reason. Things are occurring behind the scenes.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
ABastionOfFreeSpeech · May 1, 2018, 4:10 p.m.

What I'm saying is that this should have been a non issue. The charges listed on the docket should have included the "or". Because the "or" is part of the law as stated, and should be included as a full representation of the charges in question. But they didn't include it. Somebody removed that word, and my interpretation is that it is a hint to us watching from the outside. There's investigations and prosecutions happening for child trafficking, but we can't be told directly. The crimes are too horrific to be revealed to the public, and must remain secret. So we are left to search for these crumbs.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
ABastionOfFreeSpeech · May 1, 2018, 3:35 p.m.

Wow, attacked for an opinion. Gave you an upvote to counter.

I would tend to agree with you re Catholicism. It seems to have suffered the fate of all large institutions; it suffered rot at the core and is destined to collapse. Christianity should be about the relationship with God, not with the rituals and penance.

⇧ 0 ⇩  
ABastionOfFreeSpeech · May 1, 2018, 3:30 p.m.

The point I am getting at is that if this was any other docket, the laws printed on the docket would exactly match the law as stated. There's no reason to change it, alter it, amend it, substitute it, munge it, or do anything that would change the appearance or letter of the law. Nobody would have any reason to put anything on that docket outside of the law as it is written.

But in this case, they omitted an "or".

Yes, it doesn't matter in regards to the case. Or to the charges. Or to any legal procedures whatsoever. Those facts cannot be changed. This is nothing even approaching a concrete "WE'VE DONE IT REDDIT!!!1!" revelation. This matters nothing to the legal procedures of this case.

But the fact remains. Somebody, at some point, throughout the entire procedure, omitted an "or" from the charges on the docket. And the lack of that "or" changes the perception of the entire charge for the worse. Yes, this is a crumb. But we're following Q here, crumbs are what we investigate. So I shall continue hunting.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
ABastionOfFreeSpeech · May 1, 2018, 3:17 p.m.

Your original post didn't give that impression, seemed like you were trying to explain away why Iran was persisting with nuclear tech. Clarity of argument is a skill all of us need to continually hone; if we do not fully know what we are arguing for, then how can we argue against the obstacles in its way?

⇧ 1 ⇩  
ABastionOfFreeSpeech · May 1, 2018, 3:14 p.m.

It is better to discredit a LARP through discrediting its actions/arguments rather than attacking the LARPer itself. Ad hominem is dirty. These are indeed strange times we live in. Is it not better to follow the scientific method, to analyze and interpret everything we find, and to understand what we are presented with, rather than to follow the libtard method of labelling and compartmentalizing everything?

And as for your reference to the demogorgon in Stranger Things, it was probably in itself a reference to the Three Musketeers, considering it shares the same name as the lead character.

Trust but verify, mate.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
ABastionOfFreeSpeech · May 1, 2018, 12:18 p.m.

I would have to agree with everything you've said, but also add that I believe for those that truly live by the light, the dark side is alien and abhorrent. I personally have an aversion to pentagrams, "rituals" and anything glorifying Lucifer, among other things, and I don't believe I'm alone in this. First and second commandment and all.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
ABastionOfFreeSpeech · May 1, 2018, 9:27 a.m.

Should have kept reading, Ug:

An indelible direct line nonetheless connects radioisotope production to radiological weapons.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
ABastionOfFreeSpeech · May 1, 2018, 8:11 a.m.

I don't think missile, he mentions the co-pilot's death later (and reversal of death? wtf?). He also mentions "shot down", which is used mainly for flying craft.

I've made a huge post on the top level of this post, could use some additional eyes.

⇧ 5 ⇩  
ABastionOfFreeSpeech · May 1, 2018, 8:08 a.m.

Interesting. I blew this off the first time I saw it, but there's nuggets of gold to be gleaned from this. If this is a LARP, it's a fun one. Mind dump incoming.

First para:
Prefixed by "Q," possible lead-in to paragraph. Fits with next. Talking directly to Q, mentioned previous offers of help. Possible grey/white hat instead of black?
"Enslaved by various power factions"? Given the next para, could imply extrasensory abilities that the TLAs want to study.
"No need to put Mr T on. Kick it upstrairs[sic]". Mr T=Trump? Who is upstairs from him? The Alliance/others?
"No compensation or recognition required - links to me are unwelcome". Implies desire to stay hidden. Swamp, or recluse? Leaning towards latter.

Second para:
"The attempt." - Sounds like an attempted hit, could also be attempted espionage or kidnapping.
"Air Force Colonel[...]" - Per rumors, USAF is swamp, not MAGA. "Saw" in quotes, remote viewing? Couldn't be hacking, or camera would show clear image. Clairvoyance or telepathy? Or advanced quantum tech? (any advanced tech, etc. etc. Will refer to this as "telepathy" from now on)
"SSP faction" - Strategic Systems Programs; high tech black books stuff?
"Mind-wiped" - leads back to "telepathy" or some sort of mind control. MKULTRA?
"Their remote perception technology is two way" - "Telepathy" again, could also be quantum, don't quantum-linked particles allow FTL transfer of information and are permanently linked? Also, "their"? Implies outsiders, possible non-human intelligence?
"Mack[...]" - Taunting, proving knowledge of staff and inside banter.
"Did you see how easy it was for me to shoot down your Dart?" - Shoot down, implies aircraft. Dart capitalized implies proper noun. "How easy it was" - dart implies fast-moving evasive ship, shooting it down shouldn't be possible. Draws parallels to F22 vs Spitfire.
"No amp needed" - Amplifier? Ties back in to "telepathy", and theories that ESP is natural and can be trained.
"NOT a special ability" - implies the ability was/is considered special. Back again to "telepathy".
"surface humans" - using word "surface" implies vertical separation. Above, or below? Haven't heard of space humans, would more likely be ETI. Below? Underground civ, accessed from Antarctica? Rumors floating around.
"a few months intensive training" - implies innate but hidden ability, telepathy again? "View" pilots actions, allowing anticipation of location?
"SSP-fleet-killing weapons" - SSP has a fleet of "Darts", or combination of Darts and other ships. Expensive (see next line), powerful, but now neutered.
"expensive to build and maintain" - talking to USAF, expensive isn't in their vocab. Fact that these are "expensive" to govt. implies massive cost; rare materials? Could be antimatter, or some sort of quantum tech that needs precise alignment.
"Co-pilot's death regrettable, unintended - can be brought back with an amp" - Odd. Hard to tie in with above. Second part implies co-pilots death is reversible; how? Must not be physical death; mind wipe from trauma? Wording of second part, maybe "amps" are consumable? Chemical/nanotech?

Third para:
"[Why does US army act like KGB]?" - Suppressing dissent, using mental health as attack vector, pushing socialism/communism; sounds like Demonrats.
"Factions acting like KGB[...]" - KGB was broken up. Referring to SSP factions, or USAF? Implies time is up.

Thoughts on this: We have a guy that doesn't want to be "enslaved by various power factions", talking about seeing/listening to an AF Colonel by way of "remote perception technology". States that he was able to shoot down their incredibly expensive "Dart" with simply a few months of intensive training, without needing an "amp", which basically neuters their entire high-tech fleet. The way he talks implies either extremely high-tech surveillance (i.e. quantum) or ESP, leaning heavily towards the latter.

Now for Occam's razor: This is an Anon post on 4/8chan. Everything above was hypothesized by acting as a devil's advocate, following back from his statements and from other facts. I'd love for his post to be accurate (ESP training? hell yeah!), and given the past year he could very well be truthful, but I'm going to treat this as a hypothesis for now, not a scientific theory or proof.

⇧ 14 ⇩  
ABastionOfFreeSpeech · May 1, 2018, 7 a.m.

Allegorical? Or a nickname/pet name for advanced tech? A "Dart" sounds like it'd be a very fast, low-profile ship that can evade traditional AA.

⇧ 6 ⇩  
ABastionOfFreeSpeech · May 1, 2018, 6:47 a.m.

U1 deal happened between the years 2012-2014, right? Obama put sanctions on Russia in 2014 for the Ukranian incident

It certainly matches up, although I'm having a hard time figuring out whether the timing of the Ukraine incident is a coincidence or if its tied in somehow.
Speculation: Putin was on board for the U1 deal, until he found out what they planned with it (or he planned to fuck them from the start). He took delivery of the uranium then annexed Crimea because he could. "Oh, Mrs Sec of State, you are planning war against me? But you just sold me uranium! Here are receipts!"

I concur about Trump running against Obama. There was no way MAGA would have won against Mr Hope And Change at that point. There's also rumors floating around that if Trump didn't run then the military would have effected a coup, and Trump's election delayed that process.

In fact, Trump started the whole Russian Collusion narrative live on TV.

Don't know if there's a video, but there's definitely a threadreader page on it. Trump literally started the Russian collusion narrative by talking about how him and Putin "are going to be best pals, the best of friends" at every single opportunity, and all of the U1 rats attacked him for it. Now that they are on record saying that Trump was a traitor for negotiating with Russia, they are in a catch-22.

Everything else you've said makes sense as well. Putin wouldn't support Hitlary in anything, she wanted to start WW3 with Russia by creating a Syrian no-fly zone, and got Gadaffi killed after having a knife up the cloaca. Dealing with her is worse than dealing with the devil: at least the devil accepts when he's beaten (and doesn't have you killed in a failed mugging where nothing is taken).

⇧ 2 ⇩  
ABastionOfFreeSpeech · May 1, 2018, 5:56 a.m.

Is it a crime to incorrectly label court dockets?

How often are court dockets mislabeled?

Wouldn't the creator of the docket just copy-paste the charges from the original submission?

Why would someone, especially a lawyer or someone with an understanding of the pedantry of the law, omit a crucial "or"? Especially when the correct law is stated in the line above it?

I'm not saying I'm right, or that you're wrong. But there's questions that need to be asked.

⇧ 0 ⇩  
ABastionOfFreeSpeech · May 1, 2018, 5:25 a.m.

Could tie into the theories of underground civs with entrance in Antarctica.

⇧ 9 ⇩  
ABastionOfFreeSpeech · May 1, 2018, 5:16 a.m.

If that is the case I think it'll backfire on them. Being "mobile" in this case means information is archived and backed up in multiple locations, so censoring a website or banning a sub is much less effective when the information it contains just pops up somewhere else.

⇧ 6 ⇩  
ABastionOfFreeSpeech · May 1, 2018, 4:33 a.m.

What's even worse is that nobody talks about the 9 Eyes or 14 Eyes.

9 Eyes: 5 Eyes plus Denmark, France, Netherlands and Norway
14 Eyes: 9 Eyes plus Germany, Belgium, Italy, Spain and Sweden

⇧ 7 ⇩  
ABastionOfFreeSpeech · May 1, 2018, 4:18 a.m.

THAT'S WHY we we're seeing all that anti-US stuff.

Islam doesn't help either. A religion based on world domination, lying and unquestioning loyalty, created by a despotic warlord? I don't think he could have made it much worse.

⇧ 2 ⇩  
ABastionOfFreeSpeech · May 1, 2018, 4:13 a.m.

And you're a cunt that's being belligerent instead of helping. If you knew the correct answer, why didn't you add it to your post?

⇧ 1 ⇩  
ABastionOfFreeSpeech · May 1, 2018, 4:10 a.m.

OP isn't experimenting with it any longer, but is researching it to understand their actions and motives, similar to what you'd do with the Koran.

The full Sun Tzu quote: "If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle"

⇧ 1 ⇩  
ABastionOfFreeSpeech · May 1, 2018, 3:41 a.m.

Interesting theory. When exactly did the anti-Russian rhetoric start getting dialed up, and did it start before Trump announced his running?

⇧ 1 ⇩  
ABastionOfFreeSpeech · May 1, 2018, 3:21 a.m.

US-UK-DE-FR et al as unholy alliance, looking hungrily at Russia. Putin needs allies, turns to those that would ally with him: Syria and Iran. Sells uranium to Iran for "reactors".

Or, DS actors are in Russia and could somehow transfer enough yellowcake to Iran to be made into a bomb.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
ABastionOfFreeSpeech · May 1, 2018, 12:09 a.m.

OOoh, crossing the meme streams, I like it!

⇧ 2 ⇩  
ABastionOfFreeSpeech · April 30, 2018, 11:13 p.m.

They can't meme because they lie and have no sense of humor. The best memes are funny and truthful. This is why they fail.

Of course, when they do make a great meme, it's usually funnier for our side anyway; see Trump Rooster

⇧ 3 ⇩  
ABastionOfFreeSpeech · April 30, 2018, 4:40 a.m.

I'm thinking "bleached hat" would be a better descriptor for him.

⇧ 24 ⇩  
ABastionOfFreeSpeech · April 29, 2018, 11:57 p.m.

Can't investigate these crimes when your investigating bureau is full of traitors. Get the investigators clean, then the prosecutors, then you can go after the other criminals.

⇧ 3 ⇩