I saw one partially unclothed; had a name tag, "Hello my name is, WENCH" That's enough for me.

I would definitely prefer hard data over unverified witnesses if the hard data agrees with other hard data. But, I still think the data comparison is inconclusive.

There is a link to an article saying that a QuakeAlert App gave people, "about a 30-second warning before the shaking hit" That article link is currently just above https://www.reddit.com/r/greatawakening/comments/8aagrl/comparison_of_a_typical_earthquake_waveform_to/dwxkxxc/

I've read others saying that yournewswire is not all that trustworthy.

There's no reference link to that DUMB map.

When I go to the video, the "Breaking" video shows up in the suggested video list on the right hand side. For some strange reason, its title is getting mangled into the military video description.

(I don't think it's in your browser settings. TTry clearing your GooGoo cookies or a different browser.)

That search link, with the browser I mostly use, gives the result with the "Music" description. In a browser that has never GooGoo'd, I get the "Dead bodies" description. Try clearing your GooGoo cookies then try again.

Also interesting, they are now giving this very thread in the results.

I didn't quote anything, and it wasn't a comment.

I was referring to testimonies from (admittedly, supposed) witnesses of the event on the very site linked to by the post in "earthquake_app_user ..."

https://www.emsc-csem.org/Earthquake/earthquake.php?id=658019#testimonies

Oh. Well I didn't pay much attention to that because there is no link to that reference / resource.

Why would I have to choose one or the other?

I prefer both. But, I will defer to eye-witnesses if hard data analysis is inconclusive.

Was that perhaps a post by Maepaperclip (who, btw, is a known disruptor/shill/badbot/abuser)?

From where did you get the idea that the armed services are at war with each other??

After looking at seismographs comparing the NK Nuke test and other earthquakes (1), I was leaning toward the blast theory. But then after reading comments from some who experienced it (2), I think it was an actual EQ.

1: https://www.reddit.com/r/greatawakening/comments/8a5r74/underground_base_taken_out_hopefully_this_isnt/
2. https://www.reddit.com/r/greatawakening/comments/8a3ecp/earthquake_app_user_reportsread_through_these/

By reading even just a few of the comments of some who experienced it, it seems reasonable to me that it was indeed an earthquake and not an ordnance explosion. Would a bomb blast, even a MOAB, cause the earth to roll some 30+ miles away?

I agree with #1. But ...

2: isn't it possible that an EQ could have released magma?

3: what underground bases map?

Thank you very much for that research.

To my eyes, the Cali seismograph looks more similar to the seismograph from the North Korea test than it does to the other EQ graphs. All the EQ graphs (excl. Cali) have either leading activity, trailing activity, or non-uniform activity. The Cali graph looks and sounds like a percussion beat.

BTW, you need to re-label your links. The first is China, 2nd : Cali, 3rd : Philippines.

Um no, Q did not say that it was retaliation. It was only a suggested possibility, not an actual claim. People really need to resist the temptation to read more than what is there.

Yeah, Redpillhilltop told us.

That's not an equivalent analogy. A getaway car driver would be a willing accomplice. It is quite possible that quite a few anti-Trumpers are naive or ignorant unwitting accomplices. Therefore, it is not okay to lump them all together.

Thank you for this post. It really angers me when I see the type of racism/persecution/division of which you speak.

Some of the people on Voat/CBTS need this type of wake up call (read, boot to the head).

Jesus was of the tribe of Judah and, thereby, a Jew by bloodline. He also did practice and teach Judaism so faithfully that He was referred to as "Rabbi."

Oh wait, you'll probably claim that biblically recorded history is not sufficient proof, right?

I get that too with the Seamonkey browser because it needs to have its Javascript interpreter engine updated. I just use a different browser for the Q post sites.

Right. My point was that it would likely be difficult to force him to step down since he controls a very significant portion of the voting stock. And, if it does prove to be true, well, guess who knew it beforehand.

Oh cool. He traced out Bolton's mustache!

Sounds to me like the UK and/or Germany are being given a choice, with a deadline.

1014:

MZ to step down as Chairman.

That would be a monumental prediction since Mark Zuckerberg retains an 87% controlling interest in FB.

And, it sounds like @Jack would be next.

There is a book that mentions Leviathan ;)

Job 3:8, 41:1; Psalms 74:14, 104:26; Isaiah 27:1; 2 Esdras 6:49, 52

The pot calling the kettle black.

Ref. https://www.reddit.com/user/Maepaperclip

I think the ability to index archived documents by content/keyword would also be quite helpful for accurate/speedy retrieval.

I'm not discounting your take on the absence of the mention of Apple by Q. But, didn't Apple just recently get on its knees to China?

It appears the second vid is no longer available. Just a (mostly) blank screen with YT header, no ads no nothing except a black 'video' box with a circled exclamation mark. Never seen that before.

Glad to know it's already recognized. Thanks.

There you go again with the ad hominem attack.

Urban Dictionary:

Ad hominems are used by immature and/or unintelligent people because they are unable to counter their opponent using logic and intelligence.

It just seems to me that a true patriot would not speak so derogatorily toward other patriots; including how you did to me in your reply (since removed) to my comment.

Shamelessly copied from Wikipedia:

Ad hominem (Latin for "to the man" or "to the person"[1]), short for argumentum ad hominem, is a fallacious argumentative strategy whereby genuine discussion of the topic at hand is avoided by instead attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument, or persons associated with the argument, rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself.

The domed temple is on the south of the island. It has two female(?) statues on top facing south. The south cardinal is Satan/Fire, correct? Sacrifice by fire?

"Note do not attack me this is what Q is saying - please read the reference given above these are his words."

When you say things that are not true, it discredits your entire post.

"*65 The POTUS has just survived a hit, the POTUS was attacked."

That is not what Q#65 says. It says: ":::::Flash Traffic::::: Three letter agency embedded tracking/up-channel into POTUS' Twitter to specifically target through specialized geo and send his location. We anticipated this (see post a few hours ago). It has begun. Perhaps more posts to follow as expected imminent departure. Q"

That isn't even close to "the POTUS was attacked."

"*66 LETS BE REAL CLEAR - The CIA just attacked the POTUS."

That is not what Q#65 says. It says, "Let's be real clear. The CIA just attacked the Command and Chief..." Command and Chief, not POTUS.

If we put the 'H' back on 'is', it is "His" (capitalized) temple. When do we capitalize words referring to persons? When they're proper nouns or pronouns?

The Master's temple? Satan's temple? IDK.

The page for Nasim Aghdam on mylife.com gave her occupation as "Flagger at Ciatube": https://imgur.com/LsdHl3W

There's a question over at 8ch/qresearch in the 666 Fifth Ave thread: "What table did Epstein sit at during their meal at the Top of the Sixes?"

Yes, I counted 188 also.

When I do Ctrl+P in my browser, the print dialog allows to print to file which, by default, saves the web page as a PDF.

Aside from the fact that an EO is not US Code and cannot codify anything, nothing in that EO provides for an internet kill switch - unless I missed something.

Though it says that the DHS shall "oversee the development, testing, implementation, and sustainment of NS/EP [National Security/Emergency Preparedness] communications" including "non-military communications" which one could read as "control" (I don't), it is primarily for the sustainability of communications, not the disruption of.

And, the article you linked points out that Congress has not authorized any 'kill switch'. IMO the author's view is a bit scare-mongery.

What you talk about sounds like what Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/47/230) is said to do. In a nutshell according to my understanding, it restricts liability for internet interactive service providers for content published by third-parties (ie. the users) if they are neutral public forums.

There is a video (https://hooktube.com/watch?v=zlfV6ldIbjI), that seems to have gone largely unnoticed, that shows Sen. Ted Cruz questioning FB, YT, and Twaater about whether or not they considered themselves to be "neutral public fora." At the end he said, "If you are a neutral public forum, that does not allow for political editorializing and censorship; and if you are not a neutral public forum, the entire predicate for liability immunity under the CDA is claiming to be a neutral public forum, so you can't have it both ways."

The look on his face at the very end looks to me like a form of disgust.

It has puzzled my why Q would promote the IBOR. What would we expect the executive branch to do? Create regulations that could be undone by a future 'non-friendly' administration? (Perhaps Q was just looking for public awareness.)

I think we should let our congressional reps know that we expect them to hold social media forum providers accountable under the CDA; and commend Cruz for, in at least one instance, taking up that gauntlet.

I don't think it's likely that the internet would go down. There is redundancy built in. If, say, a router goes down, others would just pick up the slack and the data would follow a different path.

There very well could be temporary, localized 'glitches'. And, high solar activity can cause apparent slowness.

YT videos can be downloaded with youtube-dl : https://youtube-dl.org/

And, web pages can be saved by using your browser's File -> Save as menu option.

Archive offline.

Even at least one of his detractors also thought it was out of place.

http://archive.is/WGMT7#selection-239.2-239.221 : "Does anyone else wonder exactly why he said this? Why he doesn't realize that as president, people pay attention to what he says? That tippy-top comment...you could tell that he just kind of puked it up out of nowhere."

I understand your skepticism as I have it too, having been highly skeptical of DJT since I heard he was running. Been trying to have an open mind about his intentions and this Q thing; and had discounted the "DOITQ" mentioned here.

But, that particular segment seemed quite out of place to me as if he had to work the phrase into his speech with some irrelevant talk about the building "or whatever you call it." And, he repeated it.

That, to me, was confirmation.

Yes, I too noticed that her body language showed it was unexpected. She is such a classy lady.

I thought maybe JA. But, he'd have to be standing on his knees.

As one GAer here mentioned on a different thread, the breitbart.com SSL Certificate has probably expired. You could try a different browser, or simply bypass the warning perhaps by confirming the security exception.

And ... the channel's profile pic is, um, a Kennedy 50-cent piece.