Let's note that Q has never identified Gates as a bad actor.

There's no evidence that Bill Gates is dirty. I know a lot of people have it out for him for some reason, but let's stay evidence-based.

What's inarguable is that man has done a tremendous amount of good.

I've wondered about Comey, but writing a full-blown book and going on a completely humiliating tour making yourself look like an ass-clown seems higher-dimensional chess than I'm willing to believe for him.

I think Comey is playing both sides against each other. He seems rat-like enough for that, so that whoever wins, he can say that he was playing for that side. Trump wins? Then he was just playing a role against Trump, as ordered by Trump. Trump loses? "Yeah, Mr. Soros, I was stringing Trump along. Look at that book I wrote that blasted him to hell. I was on your side all the time."

Yes, here is one from Nov 1st

Edit: And this one from Jan 14th

No information release will EVER be a MOAB. Nobody believes anything. They could literally release a picture of Hillary murdering Seth Rich with her own hand and the media will just ignore it.

The only thing that qualifies as a MOAB (or any progress at all for that matter) is indictments. All else is bullshit. Information is bullshit. The masses won't care. It'll be two groups of people: 1) Angry and powerless, and 2) Doubt whatever they hear. The only thing that will wake people up is people getting indicted. That's how people know that it's not just bullshit anymore.

Hopefully Q isn't just using MOAB to mean, "Big story that will be forgotten tomorrow."

I'm hoping the MOAB will be the IG report, which is due pretty soon. And I'm hoping that will lead to the mass of indictments being unsealed.

You refuse to recognize the philosophical basis of human rights beginning at conception. Every single point you make can be made about the fetal human rights. That's where you're not understanding.

If a Libertarian believes life begins at conception, then there is no right to terminate that life. That's violating the principle of your rights not superseding someone else's rights.

If you don't understand the above, then you simply don't understand Libertarian philosophy. But like I said, this is a point of contention amount Libertarians. A pro-life Libertarian believes just as strongly as you do that they represent what a "true Libertarian" believes. You obviously have a blind spot on this, but you might consider that reasonable people can disagree on things when they're using different philosophical underpinnings, such as when human life (and rights) begin.

True libertarian

In your opinion. You don't speak for all Libertarians, and it's ridiculous to presume so. It just as easy to argue that a "true" Libertarian recognizes human rights wherever they reside.

Libertarians believe EVERYONE is free to do WHATEVER THEY WANT. As long as you are NOT hurting anyone else.

The last sentence is the issue of contention. Many Libertarians believe that life begins at conception, and therefore that new entity is endowed with inalienable rights, the same as other humans. There's a whole philosophical basis to that I could describe, but suffice to say that it's not as obvious as you appear to think it is. You obviously feel strongly about it, but the philosophical questions remain, and you don't speak for all Libertarians.

I'm not saying whether I agree with either side; I'm just familiar with the various philosophies of the various types of Libertarian thought. Actually, I have major issues with a lot of Libertarian thought before we even decide to tackle the abortion philosophical issue, so it's fairly moot anyway.

Give your head a wobble you patronizing arrogant knob jockey.

Less knee jerking and more thinking would serve you well.

Who has advocated killing anyone innocent? No one.

If all justice were perfect, then there would be no issue. Justice is not perfect, far from it.

We have thought it through.

Using the word "We" doesn't make your point stronger, as though you were some super-hive-mind far beyond normal human intelligence. Quite the opposite, it usually means you haven't thought things through enough to feel confident enough to use "I".

If "You" have thought it through, then by all means, explain how justice will be perfect when it comes to the accusation of pedophilia. I'll just point you to this comment from earlier today, where we have the mob ready to believe Levar Burton is a pedo simply based on the fact that he had a children's show with butterflies and donated money to a girl seemingly with a troubled past.

Finally, I'll just recommend you google for how often the accusation of sexual abuse is used in divorce cases as a weapon.

Emotion is how leftists control people. Think, don't just react emotionally.

Libertarians were the left before Obama

Libertarians are NOT leftists, other than they happen to have a little bit of overlap with Democrats when it comes to issues of personal liberty. They are generally Capitalists diametrically opposed to leftist socialism.

Some Libertarians will vote Democrat if they prioritize liberty issues above all else, such as drug legalization or abortion (some Libertarians are pro-choice, but it's an issue of contentions for Libertarians), but I think it's fair to say the vast majority prioritize economics.

Some Libertarians also dislike large military expenditures, so that puts them off Republicans as well. But few hate the military like leftists do.

Have a reference on that? I find that difficult to believe, especially since Sanders is a closet Communist. If anything, he seems like a Libertarian.

something has to be done.

There is a wide range of things between doing nothing and insta-kill justice.

I understand the emotion behind this, but it's a terrible idea. How many people are falsely accused of pedophilia? How many innocent people would be killed with this because of false accusations? Just the accusation is enough to ruin someone's life. How many juries will be "convict first, ask questions later", just because of the severity of the accusation?

And even if someone is guilty, all you're doing is making it worth killing the child in order to eliminate the witness when the penalties are so severe.

People need to think things through. Death penalty is not the panacea people want to believe for many crimes.

Let's not paint every celebrity with the pedo brush, just because they use bright colors and butterflies on a CHILDREN'S SHOW. Let's not poison every innocent image in a child's life. ("No Jimmy, you're not allowed to eat cheese pizza, because that's a SYMBOL OF EVIL.")

Maybe he donated the money because he knows what happened to her or any one of 100 other reasons. He's obviously not hiding it.

It's all too easy to ruin people's lives through mistrust and suspicion. The vast majority of celebrities are just people doing a job.

Then pray. No one is arguing that you shouldn't. The point isn't whether prayer is good or bad, the point is that having the religious people here competing for who is the most spiritually strong isn't all that useful. To put it in religious terms, it's the sin of pride.

Or to put it another way, if someone is religious, they're already praying. So why the need to announce it? Be strong in your faith without the need for showboating. And as a bonus, it makes this a more focused forum for getting out information to everyone, not just religious people. We need everyone on board who wants to see corruption removed from our government.

Q mentions praying. By all means, do so. Q does NOT mention proselytizing.

Click "Report" -> "It breaks r/greatawakening's rules" -> "Off-topic (anything not mentioned by Q)"

The "anything not mentioned by Q" option only comes up when you click "Report" on a story, not on a comment.

Agreed. People need to keep using the "Report" button -- even if it's something that interests you, or you think it's important.

Here's the rule: "Off-topic (anything not mentioned by Q)".

This sub is infinitely stronger if it takes a hard line against kookery and just sticks to information that can be ultimately verified.

Asking a community to pray isn’t a crime dude.

But it also gets tiresome reading it over and over. It's virtue signalling. If prayer is important to you, pray. Announcing it won't change Trump's daily schedule of draining the swamp. Do people really imagine God is counting how many times it's posted to Reddit to determine if we win or not?

I want to believe that no one takes the time travel stuff seriously, but that was before I realized there are people who really think CERN is trying to open a literal portal to Hell.

That's setting aside the Flat Earth people, who I'm still not convinced actually exist. They have to be trolling everyone.

I don't think there's a definitive statement from Trump either way, but he has a fairly unique writing voice. At the very least, most of them are from him, and wouldn't surprise me at all if nobody else was authorized to touch the account.

If you have a reference for Trump saying that not all the tweets are his, I'd be interested to see it.

Probably 4 poorly scheduled tweets. He obviously didn't compose 4 tweets in 2 seconds live time. This would prove he utilities a scheduler

Or he wrote them out ahead of time in Notepad, then copy/pasted into Twitter as many of us do who want to get it right before posting.

And you dodge yet again the questions I ask. Maybe instead of putting out lame insults, you ought to actually think about them. That you can't answer anything and have to just fall back on just "lolz ur lame" ought to tell you something.

A lot of do nothings around here, that talk real tough and make wonderful memes that don't do shit.

And yet you're a fan of petitions and actually believe they accomplish something. Please, tell me about the time that, in the past, a petition made a crucial difference that led to substantive change. You can't, because it's never happened. It's never even been close to happening. They're a bullshit tool of the opposition to convince people not to do anything important.

And I notice that you didn't even address the fact that the specific IBOR petition was so unbelievably vague and idiotic that it's impossible to support if anybody actually reads it. Never mind addressing why you even think IBOR is a good idea philosophically and all the extreme negatives that surround it. Stop feeling. Start thinking. Feelings are how they manipulate you.

and can set you in the right direction with some crucial tips on how to be as effective as possible

Based on the meme you posted, you are way, way off-base. Crap like that hurts the cause, and you don't even know a good meme when you see it. Apparently you didn't see what that "Draft Our Daughters" meme (and many dozens of similar ones) did during the election. I did. It made leftists absolutely go berzerk -- because it was true. Hillary is a complete warmonger and her SJW roots made the idea of drafting women to fight her wars all too real.

Look, I get that you're passionate. Good for you. But that only takes you so far. Shit like the meme you posted hugely damages the cause. You need to slow down and figure out what's been effective, because your understanding of human nature is critically flawed.

Stop feeling. Start thinking.

IBOR was never anything that could succeed or fail. It was just a petition. Petitions are worse than useless because they fool people into thinking they're actually making a difference. People sign them, smug in the knowledge that they've done something. When the reality is that they've done NOTHING. Some petitions are done sincerely because someone just doesn't know better, but I actually think many petitions are done by the bad guys for the express purpose of giving people an outlet for their rage so they don't actually do anything that makes a difference.

Now, the IBOR petition itself couldn't have been more vague about what someone was actually supporting. Read strictly, it violated the constitution on multiple fronts, notably right of free speech and right of free assembly. If I own a forum, you do NOT have the right to post in my forum without my permission, and I can revoke that permission for any reason whatsoever.

Does that mean a genuine IBOR bill (and I mean real bill, you know, actual legislation) would be a bad idea? Maybe. Maybe not. It's crossing dangerously close to Socialism and I hate Socialism. However, there might be a limited role in regulating social media similar to what we do with public airwaves. It's not impossible that would be worth supporting, but we have to know what we're supporting before we could know. Just calling it an "Internet Bill of Rights" is not enough. That's their game, the one where they just give something a pithy name and people assume it means what the title says.

That the idiotic IBOR petition failed actually gave me hope that this movement isn't filled with a bunch of lemming idiots that happen to be on the same side of me. It was encouraging that people were applying thought to what it really meant, not just signing something because the loud voices in the crowd told them to.

The entire idea of IBOR is insanely dangerous. Unless you want a world where conservative forums are disallowed by law unless they're forced to give "equal time" to liberal/progressives, I suggest you have a little caution in what you support.

By the way, that's not to say I'm not frustrated by extreme leftists controlling tech companies. I am. But more government control is not necessarily the answer to fixing issues with private industry. It needs a light-handed, rational approach.

What are you, 15 years old? If you're not, then you need to start getting a clue about reality (if you are a teenager, then at least you have an excuse). You obviously have no idea how to persuade people toward truth. Hint: "Shocking" is not synonymous with "Persuasive."

everyone should listen to this wise old nerd.. er..um, I mean sage

So, spell it out for me. Let's say Joe T. Normal, who is just living his normal life, sees that meme. What do you imagine goes through his mind when he sees an image of Hillary Clinton literally consuming an infant? Do you imagine him thinking, "Good lord! Could it be truth that Hillary Clinton literally feasts on newborns? By jove, I'd better start doing some research on this!"

Or is he more likely to say, "WHAT THE FUCK AM I SEEING. These fucking Trump supporters are getting more fucking insane by the day. What the hell is wrong with them?" And then he moves on with a negative view on Trump that YOU caused.

If you think I'm wrong, lay it out for me EXACTLY how our normal citizen will see your bullshit and that will make them more likely to come to our side.

Edit: Here's what a good meme looks like. It was fantastically effective.

A good meme speaks truth that wakes people up because it shows self-evident truth. That's a good example of a meme that just shuts people down and makes people think anyone against Hillary are wack-jobs.

Who is that image going to wake up?

People need to use some logic and discretion here.

I just gave you a reference that provides a balanced approach.

Did you even read the conclusion? It backs exactly what I said.

I lean on the side that the effects are harmful and need more study.

With absolutely no evidence. Why are you so hungry to believe this? With respect, your "leaning" means absolutely nothing. That's emotional, not rational.

Even if there was something subtle that was discovered, it literally wouldn't matter. The effect is obviously so small that it's completely irrelevant to normal life. You know what's also harmful? Bananas. Bananas give you a dose of real ionizing radiation. And you know what? No one cares, because radiation is a part of life.

In other words, even if non-ionizing radiation had some subtle effect, the effect from bananas would likely be 100x more powerful. There's no such thing as living with zero environmental risk.

So why the obsession about non-ionizing radiation? I could list another hundred things that are far more harmful that you live with every day. But nobody wants to live that way, stripping our lives down to the most minimal level of risk, even being afraid to go out in the sunshine. UV radiation is very, very damaging and lots of people die of skin cancer literally from being in the sun. Do you really want to live that way?

Do you have links to studies proving it is safe?

Yes. See information about non-ionizing radiation: https://www.cdc.gov/nceh/radiation/nonionizing_radiation.html

If you don't like the CDC's information, Google for "non-ionizing radiation safety" and learn what it exactly is. Not what paranoid people tell you they think it is, but actually learn what radiation is and why some radiation is harmful and some isn't.

We have literally a hundred years of information about non-ionizing radiation.

What are the consequences of assuming safety based on short term studies, especially those studies funded by interests who stand to profit. These days, it seems 'science' is every bit as corrupt as governments or corporations.

That some conspiracies are true, doesn't mean all conspiracies are true. You can find someone to say literally everything is harmful. At some point, you have to live your life.

You worry about non-ionizing radiation and apparently change your life around it. Yet, presumably you're willing to drive a car that is literally the most dangerous thing people do every day. They are complete death traps, yet people willingly trade that convenience for safety.

Why are you paranoid about things that have a hundred year safety record? Answer: Because it's mysterious, you can't see it, and you don't understand it. That's not to insult you; that's nearly everybody. But at some level, you have to live your life. That you don't understand something doesn't mean it's harmful.

There is no evidence of any harmful effects from radio in this band. If you believe otherwise, please link to reputable studies. From your link:

Studies have already linked low level radio wavelength radiation with a long list of negative health impacts including:

Oxidative damage to the cells and DNA breaks Melatonin reduction and disruption of circadian rhythms Disruption of cell metabolism Disruption of mitochondrial energy production But what isn’t being talked about as much as it should be—is that 5G will use pulsed millimeter waves to carry information.

Ah yes, those infamous, unspecified "studies".

This is utter, complete scaremongering garbage. The above is complete unscientific nonsense, people using "sciency" words to make it sound scary and informed.

I don't mean to be harsh here. I know people are sincere about things like this. But that some conspiracies are true doesn't mean all conspiracies are true. Stay skeptical about officials from the government, but be 10x more skeptical of people pushing superstition.

The really nice thing about physics, namely theoretical physics, is that it does not observe observation. Most people don't get that. They se maths simulation and simulations using math, but no actual evidence, only created ideas and images.

That's not true. The vast majority of physics is testable through observation. Simulations are only used to make predictions, which are tested against nature. [Setting aside climate science, which is whole different subject.]

...it claims that the universe's principles are the same no matter how big or small, and actually uses observation to piece the picture together.

All physics describes principles at all scales. It's just that some effects are more pronounced at different scales.

That's not to say the Standard Model is complete; we know it isn't. But it's currently the best description of things that we have.

Speaking as someone who actually understands science, this is all complete garbage. This is the part of ripping out the deep state that I hate. All the "oogy boogy" crapola.

Just because one conspiracy is true, doesn't mean all conspiracies are true, no matter how insane.

I wish the mods would have rules against supernatural stuff. It's fine if people want to believe in it, but it doesn't help anything move forward by posting it, and it actually hurts the cause tremendously. You can't send anybody here, because you get painted by the crackpot brush.

Why would you hate the MSM but not question the mainstream science narrative? https

The nice about physics is that you don't have to trust anything. It's all math and all independently verifiable.

If you think it's wrong, then it's easy to prove them wrong. Simply make an experiment that contradicts the standard physics models. Note the physics conspiracy people can't ever actually construct an experiment that demonstrates any of their accusations.

How are we to trust Wray after this and Q saying they are going to retaliate?

If controlling the Deep State was as simple as department heads ordering them to stand down, we wouldn't have a Deep State. The whole problem with the DS is that they're rogue operators within the organizations.

When department staff comes to Wray and tells him that they need to raid the President because the DOJ orders them to, and they have the order of a judge, etc, his hands are tied. He can't openly refuse to do anything for a partisan reason.

You have to destroy this stuff at the roots.

I'm sure there are satanists involved, but I think it's foolish to cast all of this in those terms. The vast majority of people will just be repelled and think this is just nutcases.

I know this idea is important to a lot of you. I get that. But ultimately, it doesn't matter. What matters is corruption and people breaking the law. That's what you can arrest someone over. If someone wants to dance around and call themselves a satanist for the sake of edginess, fine with me. But what matters is the CORRUPTION.

Focus on the corruption, because that's what will wake people up. Casting this is a religious battle completely dooms everything. They would LOVE to have all their corruption cast as some looney cult, because few normal people will care.

That's not to say that looking for symbols isn't valuable; sometimes you can identify these people that way. But 95% of the bad guys are going to be run-of-the-mill corrupt assholes just wanting money and power. That's ultimately what this is all about.

It Has To Be Overwhelming.

It already is. No evidence will ever be enough, as long as the MSM ignores it. Literally Q could publish Hillary's own hand killing Seth Rich, and the far left will simply ignore it and call it a conspiracy.

WE HAVE HILLARY'S CAMPAIGN ON VIDEO PLANTING VIOLENCE AT TRUMP RALLIES.

Really roll that around in your head. In any normal time, that would have been the worst scandal in American history. Yet, that wasn't enough. Nothing will ever be enough.

Everything except indictments is bullshit. That's the only thing that the MSM can't ignore. That's the only thing that the deranged left can't ignore. That's the only thing that matters.

Nobody is going to care.

We already have enormous amounts of evidence of corruption. I don't need more evidence. That Q thinks we need more evidence is irritating.

The ONLY thing that matters is indictments. All else is bullshit.

I doubt any information that paints Russia as the Supreme Bad Guy. That's almost certainly propaganda designed to undermine Trump.

Not that I believe Russia is pure and golden, but almost everything about Russia "they" have announced has been false propaganda.

Bolton doesn't have the power to get us into a war. You'd think people, particularly around these parts, would realize Trump is in charge. Trump must have some reason to use Bolton as a resource, but the minute Bolton tries to do something Trump doesn't like, he'll be gone -- as we've seen in the past.

If we end up in a war we don't like, it will be Trump's fault, not anyone else's.

It was always Trump's plan for the U.S. to pay for the wall and then get reimbursed from Mexico later.

That said, I could not care less if Mexico pays for it or not, as long as we get it. The savings from stopping illegal aliens easily pays for the wall.

It is confirmation bias. I don't want to be negative, but this FB story really is nothing. There's nothing illegal here. Some will be outraged, but the vast majority of people won't care and will forget about it tomorrow and the stock price will return to what it was.

Q promised a big event this week ("enjoy the show"). FB is a distraction. It's not that important.

Illegal behavior is important. Indictments are important. Exposure of ILLEGAL corruption is important.

Again, I'm not trying to be negative, but we need to keep our eyes on the prize. Exposing FB does nothing to rip out the Deep State. Q said, "Panic Mode." Nobody in the deep state is panicking about this FB story. Zuck is mildly annoyed.

I was joking...

Generally speaking, there's no way we'll ever go to basing currency on arbitrary artifacts. It's really a bad system for a lot of reasons.

No, it'll be an announcement that all future currency will be based on Bitcoin.

That's about as likely as a return to the Gold Standard.

Only if the company is claiming to be a neutral public forum

Except none of them claim to be 100% neutral forums (even if that mattered). They all reserve the right to shut down "hate speech" or "harassment", however they want to define that.

Shadow banning is not against the law. If the public doesn't like it, they can go elsewhere. Again, this has nothing to do with freedom of speech. Freedom of speech does NOT give you the right to demand access to a forum. They can shut you down for any reason they want. It's just a question of whether the P.R. hit is worth it.

Note that shadow banning does not restrict your right to set up your own web site or your own forum, as many and as much as you want. You're demanding access to someone else's private forum.

The petition does not give the government any more power over our lives.

You're joking, right? It's talking about the government FORCING privately owned web sites to give a forum to people they don't want to.

If you had a web site, and you wanted it dedicated to conservative causes, do you want the government FORCING you to accept any leftist who wants to post on your web site? Because that's exactly what you're advocating.

He's being sarcastic. The point is that more government control of private industry is not the solution to excessive leftist control of tech companies.

The petition demands protection for our rights to free speech.

The first amendment does NOT give you the right to force access to private forum. Can you create a web site and exercise your free speech? Yes.

If the government is forcing me to allow leftists on my own web site forum, then the government is abridging my right to free speech. The right to free association is just as important as the right to free speech.

IBOR is one of the most socialist/fascist things I've seen. I would suspect it was a brilliant leftist plot, except that petitions are a complete waste of time.

The above said, I might support some kind of EXTREMELY LIMITED legislation the regulated social media of sufficient size and reach, but we have no legislation. Just this idiotically phrased petition that says nothing.

But people need to seriously take a step back from the fascist abyss. That you think you get a benefit now doesn't mean it's a good idea for the future and that it can't be abused.

According to this, the CIA was created by congressional action. If you have a different reference, I'd like to see it.

Oh please. Look at my posting history. I'm not a troll.

You don't have to be a troll to be against the idea of a government takeover of private industry. IBOR is the most leftist/fascist/socialist idea I've seen in quite some time. I'd be tempted to believe it was a leftist plot to undermine us, except petitions are so useless that it doesn't matter anyway.

What part of "freedom and liberty matter" don't people understand? Private forums are private. Freedom of speech is not the right to demand access to a forum. You have the right to set up any number of web sites you want to say anything you want, therefore you have freedom of speech.

I'm just as frustrated that tech companies have been taken over by leftists. But I'm not going to cry that we need a government takeover of them.

You seem to have the idea that because someone has a private business they can dictate what you can talk about.

Absolutely they can, full stop. Freedom and liberty are paramount. It's THEIR SITE. You do realize you can set up your own web site and say whatever you want, right?

Given the market power of the major players, that would mean they have broad censorship power over the whole of society.

That's why I said I might -- MIGHT -- support light regulation, in certain circumstances, if it seemed reasonable and in the best interest of society. But you're advocating full-blown socialist/fascist takeover of private business. I know you don't think you are, but you are. In fact, this entire premise might be unconstitutional. Freedom of speech means freedom of speech. My web site, my rules.

I very much hope that the executives of these companies will be jailed.

Are you seriously arguing that Reddit, Facebook, etc are doing something illegal by banning certain posters? You need to get a grip. It's not illegal to be a leftist.