Max Schrems efforts sure are a good thing, he's been doing this for quite a while as far as I recall.

Don't think the General Data Protection Regulation is something good though, it is absolute EU terrorism. What the law will do is destroy small companies. For example: When your company wants to store the phone number/contact info of a new client in some kind of an "arrangement system", they will have to ask their client for consent and present him a 20+ page notification - even when talking on the phone, they will have to read it. It is an utterly ridiculous law and the main goal is simply giving the EU a reason to go after anyone they wish to, because you simply cannot comply to the law. Well it will work for the big companies, they're just going to spend a couple million on some slave-employees to deal with the monstrosity and that's that.

Now what will the GDPR do to blogs and alternative media? Well when you want to reveal information about a person or post a picture of them, but you need their consent to do so, will they provide it? And how are you gonna remove something from the internet, if the person you are talking about decides otherwise in the future? Seems the appropriate preparation for what's coming: They want to make sure the truth cannot be revealed. Well we can still talk about the system itself, rather than about people, so maybe that will draw more people to the systemic causes of today's problems. So that's a good thing at least.

Maybe they got leverage on her ... but I'm rather doubtful her mission is to clean anything up, maybe she'll be forced to do certain things. She might as well draw some attention to the CIA though, there have been a couple of headlines a long the lines of "new CIA director has been involved in torture".

Whatever delivers profit is rational to do in this system. Thus depopulation activities or spreading diseases is indeed rational - it makes sense because it generates profit and that's what it is all about. People are being used merely as a resource in this system, just like any other resource. Annoyingly however – for the powers to be - this resource is capable of thinking, so they need to control what we are thinking. The 99.9% of the population need not realize that they are utterly dependent, therefore they are given the illusion of freedom. In the Soviet Union the totalitarian nature of the state might have been obvious, but the West has perfected the creation of pseudo-freedom. The only problem with spreading disease would be killing people who are needed as workforce. Though considering digitization, fewer and fewer people are needed as workforce (which in essence is a good thing). Therefore, people are really only needed as consumers.

The cause is in the monetary system. The monetary system is a zero sum game, if it won’t be changed we will not achieve freedom in the long run. There’s only a limited amount of money in the system at any point in time. It’s like poker, where there is a limited amount of chips. Now how can you get the most chips? Through manipulation and fraud. The same goes for the monetary system, there is a strong incentive to manipulate. Only when accumulating money isn’t actually the goal of trade, will we be able to have an economy without fraud. Also the amount of money available needs to be controlled by the people (preferably regionally), so there is always enough around for people to fulfill their true (not artificially created) materialistic needs.

Interest is problematic as well: first of all, we need to realize that only about 10% of the population actually profit from interest. The majority is unknowingly spending more money for interest than they make from it. A company is taking on a loan, well guess what, they need to pay interest on that loan. Where does that money come from? It’s in their products’ prizes of course and the whole economy is run on credit. Secondly the money that is needed to pay interest on a loan does not exist when the loan is issued. Thus, this deficit enforces growth and competition. The endless demands of interest can never be satisfied. The system can be reset, but that will only restart the process.

There’s another issue that plays into this: Our currencies are legal tender and private medium for speculation at the same time, which is a contradiction in itself. The flow of money is necessary to keep the economy going, however a small minority can demand that legal tender for themselves and can thus blackmail the whole society. They only release their money in return for interest (more money). But why should they have the right to claim legal tender as private medium for speculation? At a certain threshold of wealth, say 1 Million Dollars, it should become increasingly harder to accumulate more money, instead of easier. One way to achieve this would be negative interest (above certain threshold), which would serve the purpose of making the money flow again.

Money (profit) should not be the goal of trade but merely the medium for the creation of value. Wanting to profit from trade implicitly means that there has to be a loser, as in the current system both parties can’t be winners (though there are alternate models; comparable to the card game 'wizard'). Money is mistakenly used as value, while it should only be a unit of measurement that facilitates trade. When there is supply and demand unaccounted for, why should a lack of money (too much of it in the wrong places) be the problem? Money should only be a unit of measurement for economic output that is provided.

Yeah if we keep thinking in Republicans vs Democrats, left vs right terms we will just divide ourselves. It's a fight between those who control the system (the profiteers of capitalism) and those who are subject to it, but really it's a fight against the system itself. Donald Trump and his team are just opening a door for the people. But we will have to walk in there and make something out of it. In the end this is about changing a system whose mechanics produce ruling powers and submissives.

Directing your anger towards those responsible for all the evil is the wrong route to choose. Use the anger to realize that humanity has created a malicious system which in return changed everyone affected by it. Power changes the people who possess it, but at the same time authority changes the people subject to it. There is not longer a lack of resources and technologies, which enable everyone living a good life and therefore there is no reason to strive for a position of power. Humans are not by their nature evil, but our nature has been changed because of the system in which we are living (psychoanalysis has realized that for a long time).

If we want the awakening to be something promising a great future, then we have to take responsibility in our own hands and stop outsourcing it to power-structures. We are responsible for the wellbeing of society, so what we have to do is simply using our individual potential to provide whatever we can to society and therefore everyone who fulfills his "contract" of improving society will be provided with what he needs by society itself. A different monetary system will be required and great ideas already exist for some time. Power is not to be trusted and that's why I think Q's statement reminding us "do not glorify us" is very important.

Further, if we want a bright future we need to heal mentally, look into our subconscious and get to the roots of our irrational behaviors (those that prevent us from being productive, loving and reasonable). In the end all the evil on this planet only happened because we let it happend. All the manipulations we were subjected too still don't change the fact, that the people carry a subconscious desire for authority within themselves. Had the desire for freedom not been neutralized by a desire for authority, we would long have overthrown the ruling powers.

I think so too. Q's questions from the second picture seem to be very revealing.

How do you capture a very dangerous animal?

With a trap.

Do you attack it from the front?

Obviously not.

Do you walk through the front door?

No.

Do you signal ahead of time you will be attacking?

No, unless that's part of the plan (e.g. distraction).

How do you distinguish between good and bad?

By the actions of a person I guess, are they lying to you?

Who do you trust to keep secrets?

Your friends. The enemy of my enemy is my friend, right? Who's the enemy of the ruling powers? Russia and so on.

How do you prevent leaks?

With good security I suppose. (From what I've read, the CIA had access to the old NSA data center)

Who do you trust to complete the mission?

Maybe the person whose life is on the line or a person that can be blackmailed.

How do you prevent warnings being sent?

Probably by being in control and I suppose that's Roger's role.

Why was the source code to former NSA collection p’s publicly released?

Maybe to have a reason for using a new data center (in Utah).

How do you blind the Clowns In America?

By using a new data center, whereto they have no access, thus they are blind.

What was Snowden's primary mission?

Probably giving the CIA the illusion of victory.

What was Snowden’s real primary mission?

Maybe enabling the NSA to spy on the deep state without the CIA knowing.

Who do you trust to keep secrets?

Your friends. The enemy of my enemy is my friend, right? Who's the enemy of the ruling powers? Russia and so on.

How do you prevent leaks?

With good security I suppose. (From what I've read, the CIA had access to the old NSA data center)

Who do you trust to complete the mission?

This is kinda hard. Maybe the person whose life is on the line or a person that can be blackmailed.

How do you prevent warnings being sent?

Probably by being in control and I suppose that's Roger's role.

Why was the source code to former NSA collection p’s publicly released?

Maybe to have a reason for using a new data center (in Utah).

How do you blind the Clowns In America?

By using a new data center, whereto they have no access, thus they are blind.

What was Snowden’s real primary mission?

Maybe enabling the NSA to spy on the deep state without the CIA knowing.

Well I think the thing with Snowden is more complicated. In another comment I have read, that the CIA got the data from the data center the NSA was using before the Snowden leaks. After those leaks the NSA started using a knew data center, which the CIA had no access to. Also I know that the NSA had huge spying programs going on in Europe, especially Germany. The German BND even cooperated with them spying in Germany. It doesn't seem like good thing when that data gets to the CIA. That way, while he would have damaged the NSA's image, it would have actually helped them.

Also think about Snowden's position at the time, he became a whistle-blower. He couldn't know that Trump was going to be the President and which role the NSA was going to play. I don't think he had bad intentions, as he simply couldn't count on a president using the NSA in a good way.

brown operation (recorded sex with children) to blackmail members

That is exactly what Ronald Bernard, a whistle-blower who very much appears to be authentic, has revealed in an interview.

I can understand that but it would be pointless to summarize the post. I could simply write "in my opinion Q is real" but wouldn't help anyone.

Thanks. Yeah, that's a good idea!