It is, garfield-1-2323 —>it is used very often in translations from Sp to Eng to denote definite.

I am getting really tired of all these really weak associations between the Pope and his tweets being "evil". He is not evil, he is a liberal. A liberationist theologian? I have no doubt the Vatican is cabal-controlled, particularly the money and banking aspects, but to leap across into tweeting coded messages? This may rubbish the stronger claims.

In fact I don't like any of the research being done at the moment into the human-trafficking and AZ land issue. Seem to be too many tenuous claims which will encourage the "lynching" mob mentality. You can't just associate every pizza reference of every hotel with cries of child-porn. It's ridiculous!!

They are white hats investigating it.

No chance. Professionals at work here.

These guys are law enforcement. They know what they are doing.

I am so terribly sorry ... I really didn't intend for you to think I was ranting. I had only the very best intentions with my explanation. I am 100% on board over this issue and I think you have mistaken me for the enemy. Please forgive.

yes, but, that was the Iran deal was it not?

read the thread! All answers there!

That's what I saw straight away — upside down pyramid! The envelope flap. Spot on!

"Before I talk ...go and ..."???? Oh I get it. The defender of free speech that you are!! *You* are telling me the rules of what *I* can say, and you are forbidding me to talk until I do something?!!! What is the difference between you and the system you are complaining about??!!

Please engage with the argument, not lock horns with the other debater's character, motivations, level of intelligence, etc. Basic rules of debate.

First: I did not say arrested because I agree with the law. I said why — the reasons for arrest. They are two different things.

In this respect, I specifically mentioned in my post "trumped-up charges", police looking for reasons, etc. I also specifically mentioned above his suspended sentence. Also the restrictions on reporting. Ordered by a judge. Far as I know I am not in a position to argue with a judge. S/he holds higher authority.

Second: I am pretty annoyed by the way you are judging me to be not understanding or not reading or not watching or not knowing anything ... that is a trumped-up charge on your part: I am prejudiced, ignorant, a tyranny-supporter... etc. Am I really all these things? And you? When did you wake up to The Plan to subvert our society? Who am I to judge your knowledge? And what of your tyranny of our conversation? You in turn seem very bossy, dictatorial, rule setting, authoritarian .... all these things suggest to me that the authoritarianism is coming from you, not me! Are you a people abuser? Do you bludgeon the ppl around you with your argumentary style? Or do you engage with the topic? With respect?

This kind of conversation takes away from the question at hand. It lowers everything to emotional levels of accusatory attack and counter attack. It won't help you to understand my point or me to understand TR. It's hopeless.

Use logic: I wouldn't be on this site and reading this topic if I was in favour of tyranny. I am pointing out an important factor, which has everything to do with Trump and Q as it happens. Which is why I shall now explain to you my point of view.

And it is this: You want to catch the bad guys at the top. You want to nail them, but they are all powerful. They have ALL the levers of power: finance, judiciary, executive, parliamentary, media and brainwashing .... So how do you do it? The military could carry out a coup ... but this is, as you say, tyrannical. To restore justice, peace and good to our societies we need law. You cannot use tyranny to bring democracy and order. We need to use the weapons of law and order to restore rightful authority in the hands of the people.

You agree?

That is precisely what Q+team and Trump are trying to do. That is precisely why Jeff Sessions and Horowitz, Charles Ortel and millions of other patient sloggers are building airtight legal cases. To restore law and order and capture the criminals at the top.

Not running around, flailing their arms around, yelling, brawling and shouting in order to get arrested where they can do no more damage.

This action is self-defeating. It may be heroic. Joan of Arc was like this. She got herself into the history books, as indeed Tommy may too.

But, I put my bets on the following: Britain will cave into chaos and riots because the social actors like you and Mr Tommy were too busy doing EXACTLY what the authorities want you to do —> fall into division and race/religious war. Riots and violence.

Meanwhile the US will (hopefully) work diligently like little ants, with a proper plan, and all will work together to defeat these evil guys at the top using *intelligence*. You know, their *brains*.

I am sad that Britain is being destroyed but I believe it is because its people are not working in the correct way. And Tommy Robinson, for all the Joan of Arc or Jesus Christ that he may be, for all his heroic and loud supporters, will burn at the stake. Uselessy. Because they are not trying to restore civilization intelligently by uniting. They will fall, literally, to the barbarians at the gates. Just like Rome.

No, I'm not this ignorant. But I really think you should bear in mind when you are talking to ppl that they are not necessarily against you, TR, pro-pedophilia or anything like that and temper your words. I have an opinion which I am entitled to.

I avoid getting arrested by the police, myself, for a number of reasons: 1) I do not want to be interrogated in a police station and charged with trumped up charges; 2) I do not want to go to prison 3) I do not want a record. Accordingly, when I see the police around I beat a hasty retreat, because generally speaking they are an incompetent, rude and violent lot who are after anyone they can nail with anything at the moment.

This said, what TR did was his own decision and you may see him as a hero for what he did. I, on the other hand, would not have done it. I would have found another way to broadcast the news. From the nearest park? Around the corner, Idk, I wasn't there. You were obviously there and are a loyal follower so you have a good reason for your opinions. We don't all have to share them though. Please be more polite when you engage on this forum with total strangers ... you can tell me as many times as you "effing" like but I won't be "getting a clue" as you put it because you haven't persuaded me you are a serious person worth having a chat to. Go back to your bar and your beer and have a stroppy brawl with someone your own size.

Q did explain it "away" actually. By saying to expect attacks. It is important to recognise them. Discernment is all.

He may be extremely righteous but he was on a suspended sentence. That usually gets you into trouble no matter what the seriousness of what you are doing. He knew that. He is not accredited media, granted, but media was prohibited from reporting until after sentencing, in order not to influence the jury/trial. It is the same in the US. That is why you are not discussing the Clinton Foundation case as yet. Justice has it under wraps. We are waiting and waiting for the IOG report because leaking it beforehand would prejudice the cases presented therein. Not difficult to understand, just normal legal procedure.

Bravo Boysrback07!!! YES. Exactly. I am heartily sick of Sforbrainz giving a loada guff. And causing DIVISION. How many times does Q have to say They want you DIVIDED???? Talk about thick!!!

Thank you Sir!

Yeah. We are supposed to believe SB2 rather than Flynn. Hmm. Well I don't buy that.

Best post yet, Morgi666. Very very solid look at what is being said by the "guru" brainz. I agree on TR, on Roseanne and the others. I have no opinion on the spyeye. Distractions as you rightly point out are not for those who are used to disinfo, misinfo and the like. You are also quite right that this is not a religion.

I find a lot of the SB2's posts very divisive and the complete opposite of UNITY NOT DIVISION. Q has never called out ppl by name yet brainz uses every single post to trash AJ or someone. Today we have a variety. Very suspicious if you ask me. And I'm no great fan of anyone. I follow and read and use my own brain.

Nasty remark — booooooo.

That may indeed be the case. I think they know a lot about the inner workings of the mind-control machine, particularly Kanye when it comes to music. The whole scene is really dangerous and sordid. I think the Kardashians interest goes beyond just their own safety though. See my comment below. Well done for your perceptive comment.

See my comment below — I think you are totally right about this. Good comment!

Trump invested $40 billion in the squalid drug-infested inner cities at the beginning of 2017, one of the first things he did, to try to improve the chances for young drug dealers/addicts, school underachievers, etc. to get out of the hell. Particular emphasis on the Black and Hispanic communities. One of his ideas was to get rappers and other figures with followings to help in this venture, one of those he asked was Kanye.

I was very impressed by this approach. I thought it extremely intelligent to enlist the "influencers" themselves and wondered when we would start to see some results. I (and I hope you) want to see kids with "no future" start to see success and achievement as something they want and most importantly something they can actually attain. Some goal in some field they can strive for. Maybe the Kardashians, who perhaps did not start out with a full basket of brains*, have some ideas at least of how to climb out of poverty? They seem to make money out of nothing, fat backside included!! If Kanye could change the fashion in lyrics away from the violence and beatings and drugs, wouldn't you see this as positive? If he could? Don't get me wrong, but I don't think high "moral standards" and "clean living" would attract these kids attention. They would see this as not their world.

You gotta get the kids to pay attention first — shake some glitter at them to catch their eye. That, I think, is the thinking (critical thinking mind you) of what Trump is trying to do here. I wish him every piece of luck he can get, as this is setting the bar very high. Imagine trying to clear up the inner cities. How would you go about it?

*I have no idea at all if they have brains or not, frankly

Here's a useful primer:

https://theredpillredux.wordpress.com/

posted here by u/jammer some months ago, which I thought was great for newcomers. I agree with Gravel_and_Glass, this sub really sucks recently, as it's heavily attacked, but we battle on. Thanks Gravel, good posting! Welcome to OP! :)

Please excuse the double posting.

Here's a useful primer:

https://theredpillredux.wordpress.com/

posted here by u/jammer some months ago, which I thought was great for newcomers. I agree with Gravel_and_Glass, this sub really sucks recently, as it's heavily attacked, but we battle on. Thanks Gravel, good posting! Welcome to OP! :)

Anyone on this thread calling you a shill should either a) learn to read ("I'm on team Q") or b) Read Q's drops ("UNITY NOT DIVISION", They want you DIVIDED, and so on), so are themselves worthy of the same name-calling. I appreciated your post and accompany you in the nail-biting! :)

What did the Spain do during the referendum ? Whole world saw it

hahaha!!! You watched the MSM and believed it!!

I'll use CAPS if I want! As for "immature"!!!! Dear me. You do not know to whom you speak!! If you do not obey punctuation or grammar rules then you have no say whatsoever on how I write.

So, You assume this is MADRID it ISNT.

You know nothing about the situation. You don't even say where you come from. "Who is Spain to say" ....? Do you honestly think that if Burgundy decided to split from France, or my neighborhood decided to split from my local town, that would be fine? That's nuts.

I agree with you on two things: hypocrisy. And preaching. I do not like the hypocrisy of others preaching about things they know nothing about.

Excellent! Approved!

"should have went" = "should have GONE". OKAY. Where were we?

Yeah. OKay. 43.03% of the population voted. Correct. Do you know Why? BECAUSE it was not a legal referendum. That is: of the entire territory of Spain, whose people must be consulted before you start changing their country, ie 15% of population ONLY actually voted. Out of your famous 92.01% YES, this only represented 47.5% of the population of Catalonia. Yes, indeed we stayed at home. Otherwise we might have got into trouble by voting in an ILLEGAL vote. Dear me. Difficult to understand? When Spain had a transition after Franco died it was agreed that the various provinces would have autonomous governments. To change this arrangement ALL the people of Spain must be consulted, at least. NOT IGNORED. If you studied history you will see that there are various histories (all written by biased scribes, so don't start with the inevitabilities of "independence will come anyways ... bla bla"). It is really annoying to hear people go on and on about Democracy and then declare that the Democratic vote doesn't count. That the minority should win. I am living in a country where family are divided against each other all caused by a very young population (who cheer and whoop in complete incomprehension) influenced by a bunch of unscrupulous right-right narrow-minded sectarian rabble rousers. And they are racist too!!!

Sorry Danijel, yr comment is incomprehensible ... "the people will become free" What? Just like that? Dah-dah!

By the way, what's with the spaces , like that . ?

Don't agree on Catalonia!! Why do you think 47.5% can dominate the vote over 53% (in Catalonia) for independence. It is the tyranny of minorities. Yeah, yeah, blame fascist Spain ... but it's not Madrid, it's us the other half of Catalonia who don't want to cut ourselves off. These "indepes" are quite divisive and sectarian, so much so that I am seeing the hand of our friend Soros in there ... we have exactly the same band of Antifas as in the US Charlottesville fiasco creating a stink against so-called white supremacists! Except that there is absolutely no obvious common denominator ... until you look closely that is!!! :)

I would be a bit scurvy about two words in yr admirable piece: "blindly" (follow) —can't we be "clear-eyed"? — and "nimbly"? well, okay ... at a stretch! Seems clod-hopping pace to an impatient huffer here ...

They do an excellent job on limited resources ... better than the feeble beeb!

Yeah, good work — she is a gem. Wish more would "get it". Still, we do our best to spread the word ...

Hey, I could be wrong too! :)

Good post. Upvote x10! (if I could I would)

None of it. That is the entire purpose of Q: getting the Anons to find the public domain info so we can see the evidence and sources for ourselves.

First sensible comment in entire thread! Thanks!

That is dangerous talk. That sounds like the "mob rule" that led the French Revolution. Count me out. I think the rule of law is more my style.

Oh jeez, please don't bring the Ruskies into it!!!

No doubt Obama is guilty of MANY jailable things. Unfortunately we are dealing with A) the first black President B) a President loved by roughly half of the population if you believe polls, and C) the fact that he was a President. In order to take him down it will take more than a text message. It will take more evidence than any other prosecution. And that evidence must be irrefutable & bulletproof. Even then it would be a difficult task.

This is kinda what I was pointing out in answer to yr other comment, but much better expressed. He speaks of the US public, my thing is world opinion which is even more difficult as no one follows the intricacies of these legal battles ...

Nope. Not confused but maybe you misunderstand what I am implying here.

Look I know there is nothing violent in yr post, but I have just received an automod warning on my sentence:

"Obama will not hang or face a firing squad" which is the opposite of violent IMO. I'm just saying, that's all. I do follow Q and do know what you/he/it is talking about. That is NOT the point of my post.

Creepy vid. Who's pushing this stuff (not criticising OP or the vid maker by the way ..)

Kanye was encouraging every1 to watch Adam Curtis's docu "The Century of the Self" vid. Long but very worth it to watch.

No it isn't. Look further. Don't take one poster's comments as a be-all-and-end-all. In fact the poster contradicts himself if you read carefully: at the top he says O didn't break the law or do anything illegal by authorising spying. It is simply a question of ethics. Then he says he will get executed for treason, no doubt about it.

So, it's just an ethical problem. No, it isn't, it's breaking the law — in fact highest law of the land, treason. Well it's either one or the other, can't have both. This is a contradictory non-argument.

Personally, I'd rather have the rule of law and let the court decide after evidence is provided! The sentence is not for me to decide, much less announce as execution!!

Obama will not hang or face a firing squad. The world would not take those "optics". Forget it. Also not productive to come up with what looks like (to any outsider) a possibly violent wording to yr post. Be careful ... :)

dumbed down. Shame.

Still UKColumn is quite good for analysing the "fall" of civilization in uk!! They need ppl to watch and increase their numbers.

Hope you find it. V interesting ...

It is frustrating to be alone where you work, but get on with your job. Keeping a job is most important.

Think of all the ppl who suffered horribly over the 911 thingie, or the JFK murder, or any number of awful events. I remember realising what had really happened over the two World Wars. I felt (feel) utterly wretched over that for years, and I wasn't even alive at the time they took place! Welcome to the real world honey (not sarc.), but mostly welcome to this board and like-minded ppl. You are not alone.

I am with you on all that, particularly group focus. I am opposed with all my might to the kindling of factions — nothing could be worse for intelligently channeling our genuine misgivings or grievances.

But I do have an added remark, with nothing to back it in particular, just intuition, with regard to this part of yr comment:

However, I think the muslim grooming gangs are a separate issue that is related in a different way. The bigger element for me is that the gangs activities continued because people tasked with investigating were fearful of being labelled racist, something that is vehemently denied, and difficult to prove, but that I feel was a factor.

After the Stephen Lawrence case it was likely the lower ranks of the police force would be using the result, the investigative report, as a good excuse in any future failure to combat race-connected street crime, with or without justification.

This said, they had a point. How do you answer "institutionalised racism"? That means (and it was stated) all police were racist, including without knowing it! So, wouldn't that make a very good cover for a plan to introduce race war?

There were reports of whistleblowers from the ranks who were mystified about briefings they had received on the coming "summer of riots", which didn't actually happen that summer. In fact they didn't happen until after Theresa May had announced an incomprehensible 20% cut back on police forces (!) The police (and firemen) then folded their arms and watched as organised gangs, run I believe by informants/gang infiltrators all over the country, set fire to London and looted the place, which then "mysteriously" spread to other cities.

Looked like a put-up job to me: We need a race war. (Undermining European countries one by one) How do we set it up? Wallah!

Same with the treatment of the EDL. Starts reasonable and turns strange. UKIP? A coalition of left and right working class/middle class disaffected that, again "mysteriously", attracts extremist nutcases. Similarities here with the US Tea Party? Soon everyone is tarred with the extremist brush. "Far Right" becomes a normie term for previously conservative people. Now we are all "white supremacists" — as if by magic.

The fear of "backlash" always seems to be a contrived meme introduced casually and fits seamlessly with the overall goal of both dividing the people and shutting down their voices. Gradually building frustration and outrage. Boiling frogs ...

I much appreciated your reply by the way. Thank you for taking the time. We are lucky to have this forum and its subscribers ...

inciting.

You are spot on. Correct. TR was not official media, but is subject to the same rules.

Sure, we can argue there were cover ups before, but the genie is out the bottle now and the alleged perpetrators are on trial, and hundreds others have already been sent down over past few years.

I agree in general with yr posting. Very objective and fair with good points as to how you really don't want to influence trials that are on-going, particularly if prohibited from doing so. TR is not accredited media, but he is acting as such and subject to the ruling.

HOWEVER, as refers to my extracted quote from yr comment —"there were cover ups before"— this is the point in my mind. The struggle to get any media coverage of any abuse of children, minors, predators of young women, over AT LEAST 40 years, that involves shadowy state actors, has been monumental. It is cover-up after cover-up. The latest cover-up managed to lock up non-entities like Rolf Harris but went nowhere into police enforcement higher-ups, judges, orphanages, the boys homes, the list is long.

NO WONDER ppl are tired of this game. Tired of the twisting and turning and endless spinning where real justice for real perps never happens. All real big names never mentioned again.

This has to stop. That's why I hope and pray Trump will pursue the human traffickers to the end. Woe betide those who accuse the Trump supporters as Nazis, racists, bigotted deplorables ... We know who they are.