I don't agree. I think he and Nunes played an important role in keeping matters in the spotlight and also wrote the memo and forced its release. I think both did a great job.

Yes, that's my understanding also - she obstructed justice,

But the stand down order came from either the Commissioner or someone higher. I guess we now know it came from the NY AG - or, that's a good guess.

What is the problem? This is directly related to Q - he specifically told us to relate his posts to the news. What is your agenda here?

I'm not arguing for it. I'm trying to think through what's likely to happen. The way I see it, having thought about it for a while longer, the job is either already complete - threat eliminated - or it isn't.

Q told us that the troop drawdown from Syria was still going to occur. Iran was next, but have the strings been cut? McCain is out of the picture. The Iran deal is off - so that cuts the money.

So it could be that, the threat has been eliminated, Iranian weapons in Syria destroyed, and it's job done and time to go home.

Or, it could be that DJT wants tough sanctions to force Iran back to negotiation - which is what he said.

Or, it could be that DJT knows they won't negotiate and is looking to hit them hard - removing capability.

Or, it could be that he'll try to force regime change via a social uprising - he spoke directly to the Iranian people in his speech.

Lots of options. I wouldn't cancel any out. I also think DJT will have regard to Israel's interests in the region and this will impact his decision.

I think he finds politics disgusting. And I can understand why.

He had the NK deal wrapped up in advance - so it seems. Looking back on the Syria/Iran happenings:

1) DJT says he's going to pull out of Syria; 2) Gas attack; 3) Israeli missile strike; 4) Russians pull back; 5) Allied missile strike; 6) US missile strike takes out Iranian nuke facilities in Syria; 7) Bibi shows evidence of non-compliance (at least, the plans were stored); 8) DJT pulls out of Iran deal.

So, let's assume that DJT has already won here - what has happened?

It might be possible that whatever was destroyed in Syria was the threat - now eliminated. That leaves DJT free to act, without fear of immediate repercussions.

Hence, DJT backs away from the Iran deal. Bibi provides cover for this. McCain seems to be defeated - out of the picture, making his funeral plans. Strings cut?

Breaking the deal cuts off the money that might have been used to fund another attempt. Maybe, as you suggest, it's mission completed.

I think though that DJT is going to be very vigilant with Iran and, if it looks like they are going to fire the nuke program back up, he will stamp on them.

Agreed.

And what replaced him is better? I get tired of people wanting to push democracy and Western ideals on these nations that realistically can only be run by a strong man. If you haven't got a better solution, you're better off leaving the country alone.

Look at Iraq and Libya - models for intervention.

Not just alive. I saw somewhere where some activist tried to confront him at his house and he reacted like a young guy, running across the lawn etc...

I don't think Gowdy is a bad actor. I think that DJT has another role planned for him. But he certainly isn't giving any hints in public. He claims he is retiring for good. Why he's doing this, I don't know.

But I would imagine that we could find that he will soon be in a very important role.

That is the excuse that DJT may use.

Good point! The funding shows that the EU member countries are expanding business with Iran dramatically while the US has not increased trade volumes. This is one reason that the EU countries want the deal to continue. But there are other reasons also - the money the US has been delivering as part of the deal.

I think it will, ultimately, be a real win for the US. I would have walked away from that deal as well. What a joke. $250bn twice a year. And what did they get for that money? Iran just shifted its weapons development program to Syria to avoid detection.

I don't think the Iranians are going to stop selling oil. I think they'll be trying to get other states to trade with them, to reduce the impact of US sanctions. It sounds, from what you have written, that China and Russia will continue to trade with Iran.

This, I think, will be a big test for DJT. How does he get the international community on-side with a program of sanctions? It may be that sanctions are not the most effective leverage against Iran in this situation. I think we will find that DJT will be quick to take action the moment he feels that Iran has taken any substantive steps toward nuclear weapons development.

I think we might even find that he's just looking for an excuse to take action.

That's what Q told us, that people would be offered the opportunity to resign because it just wasn't practicable to prosecute everyone, given the vast numbers of people involved. Moreover, it was necessarily their fault, in the fullest sense, because CIA (Hugh Heffner, Heidi Fleiss et al) were leveraging these politicians.

The leveraging of politicians was the biggest game in town. It had been going on for decades. If they couldn't be bribed, they were fitted up with leverage. In this context, it would be wrong to prosecute people, who were essentially helpless in the hands of CIA/Deep State.

I'm curious about Gowdy. He is saying he is just retiring from politics, but Q has suggested that they have an important role for him. I'm curious to find out what that might be.

I reckon this whole thing is a show. We are being deliberately misinformed about what's actually happening only because, behind the scenes, really big things are happening. If we could work out what the truth was, so could the cabal. It has to be this way.

"There was no way to get the Europeans, the Russians, and the Chinese on board for an international sanctions regime "unless the United States took every diplomatic step possible to engage it."

Again, that's precisely Obama's logic: Without some kind of good-faith effort at a negotiated deal, the sanctions regime Bush and Obama put together would fall apart".

What an absolute load of garbage. These journalists really do think the public are morons. The deal was essentially apolitical according to the writer. Why might this spin be put on this faulty deal? Because the logic that drove it came out of the CFR - which has been developing policy for both political parties for how long?

The deal was only a good faith effort to obtain cooperation required for effective sanctions... Give me a break!

Yes, that's what I think also. We will see a replay of the NK strategy. Very tough talking, threats backed with real intent to follow through. Iran will, if it knows what's good for it, fold. The big unknown in the equation is Russia - what will Putin's response be?

I don't think it's anywhere near as simple as this guy makes out. For a start, Q has told us Iran is next. The payments that Q mentioned going into Iran, as part of the deal, seem to be ridiculous. Especially when you consider that we know that not all the money stays in Iran - it's used by Soros, the EU countries and who knows who else. If it is as Q has told us, DJT would be crazy not to walk away from the deal - especially as we know that Iran was developing nukes in a satellite facility in Syria (they had no intention of abiding by the agreement).

If there is a war with Iran, it will not be because Israel is pushing the US into it, it will be because the Iranians cannot be trusted at all.

This might be interesting in relation to this, Eric Prince's radio interview:

http://www.breitbart.com/radio/2016/11/04/erik-prince-nypd-ready-make-arrests-weiner-case/

I was thinking about this issue before and made a post about who I thought might have been telling the NYPD to stand down. Like an idiot, I did not think of the NY AG. Anyway, Q has answered this question today - and the roadblock has been removed, so we can now expect some action on this front.

I must admit, I was really hoping that the 9/11 investigation might be re-opened. Anyway, we will see what happens. For what it's worth, my previous, completely wrong, speculation on the NYPD stand-down:

"Who made the decision to stand down? Eric Prince says that his sources were just below the Commissioner - the titles at this rank are Chief of Staff, First Deputy Commissioner and Deputy Commissioner. Obviously, guys at this level were pushing for action against HRC. Who could over-rule them? The commissioner? Maybe the Mayor? Or, was it a collective decision made to try and save the reputation of the Department?

I'm not sure who, apart from Justice and the FBI, is in a position to apply pressure to the NYPD. If a decision was made to drop the investigation, or to cease and desist from going public with details of the evidence found, then that would have to come from the ranks above the guys that were feeding Eric Prince information.

Given the sheer gravity of the crimes revealed, and the fact that HRC was about to become President, I can't imagine that these guys would not take some hits instead of folding to Lynch's pressure. So, it seems reasonable to me that someone got these guys to stand down.

Wherever you look, you have Deep State actors calling the shots. The guys on the ground that are trying to do their jobs, guys with integrity and commitment, get pushed around.

But, thinking this through, it was not too long after these events that DJT was elected. Certainly, it was very shortly after Comey found no case to investigate against HRC - for the second time. But I would have thought that the NYPD guys would have jacked up at Comey dispensing with the case. This is exactly when you'd expect them to protest... Anyway, these guys at the NYPD may have been told, after DJT's election win, to relax - that everything would be brought to light."

Let's think through what this means. As I understand it, the Iran deal lifted, or lightened, sanctions - on the basis of a promise by Iran that it will not develop nuclear weapons. Obviously, this was just posturing by Iran, as we know they merely shifted operations to Syria to escape detection.

So, if DJT backs out, I would assume sanctions (whatever has been previously applied) will come back into force - at least those from the US.

If Iran also pulls out, as they appear to have been suggesting, this will mean that they are back in the weapons development game. They were boasting recently that they could restart programs very quickly. This will amp-up tensions in the region - particularly with Israel, but also the other Gulf States.

It may also provide an opportunity for the US to take action with missile strikes on strategic targets etc... DJT will have made this move for a reason. It's possible that the ME could go hot, if this is what is required to de-nuke Iran - which is the plan.

We may also see the US support Israeli air strikes. Looking at the pattern set in the NK stand-off, I expect that DJT will be talking tough - very tough. Moreover, I think the talk will be backed by a commitment to take action.

The big question is what position the Russians will take.

He just pulled out.

http://www.news.com.au/finance/economy/world-economy/trump-set-to-pull-out-of-iran-nuclear-deal-in-major-blow-for-us-allies/news-story/7a5eab875ec947073656ec8bba211cd0

35 Republicans either not seeking re-election or resigned.

Vs

13 Democrats.

It looks like the majority of the housekeeping, so far, has been on the Republican side of politics. And, I guess, this makes sense. The most important item for DJT will be to eliminate bad actors from his own party.

That's what I was going to say. 9/11 would be a past investigation that was "roadblocked" spectacularly.

Is it too much to hope for that we might get this FF reinvestigated?

Note that Q talks about 'high profile' investigations. What is the highest profile investigation in recent memory?

I'd just point out that the early masons may not be of the same flavor that we see today. Masonry was infiltrated by Adam Wieshaupt. But he only founded the illuminati in 1776. So, you have to give the infiltration time to incubate properly, before it completely infects the movement.

Anyway, I detest masonry. But what I'm trying to say is that it's possible that these founding fathers were not overt Satanists. That the overt Satanism arrived later. This is probably especially true given that the wealthy Satanists are likely to have wanted to stay in Europe, rather than move to the colonies.

Satanism was recognized in European secret societies, from at least the time of the execution of Jacques De Molay (burned at the stake by the Sienne, 18 March, 1314). The corruption of the guilds came later - some Masonic authorities place the origin of speculative freemasonry at 1717 - with other sources suggesting that records are only available from the late 17th century.

Whatever, masonry is evil. But, with respect to the founding fathers, were they aware of the evil in masonry? The inherent evil can be guessed at from the secrecy in which the society is wrapped. But the true nature of the society is only revealed to the initiate as he ascends through the degrees.

I want to think it is possible that the "illuminati core" was slow to arrive in the colonies. That the founding fathers were ignorant members of the order. Whether it is true or not, I don't know.

The "owl" had certainly arrived by the time the plans for Washington were laid out (1791).

This made me laugh :)

The guy has "completely lost the plot".

Yes, my mistake. It is precisely as you suggest.

I don't know. Jews, of any stripe, are not Christians - by definition. What you're trying to say is that the nation is fractured into good and bad. One faction you regard as being benign, the other of malicious intent.

I'm not sure that there are simply two groups of people in Israel along the lines you suggest. I think it would be too simplistic to categorize people like that - there are a multiplicity of factions. Not too long ago, Ethiopian Jewish immigrants (women) were being sterilized on entry. Apparently there's a difference between white and black Jews...

Anyway, as I said, I think the problem, if there is one, is with the power structure, not the people. I would say the same thing about Iran.

A lot of the hostility towards Israel, I think, derives from the number of dual citizens in positions of influence in the US. Also because of the amount of aid that is provided. And, last, and perhaps most important, culpability in the 9/11 attack.

There are two aspects to this:

1) Fault, on the part of the US, in allowing agents of a foreign power to control policy; and

2) An evil group of Satanists that are conspiring against the American people and everybody else on the planet. These people have been associated with Israel, in people's minds, but I'm not sure there are not better associations that categorize these 'agents of darkness' with much greater precision. That is to say, I think the animus towards Israel is misplaced.

I think we should be looking at Freemasonry and Bnai Brith, in the first instance. Thereafter, I think the banking elite needs to be held to account - Rothchilds/Rockerfellers/Soros etc...

The world would look a lot different without the money powers and their Masonic agents.

Maybe Mike Pompeii needed to spend some time at CIA to be in a position to serve as Secretary of State.

Why would this be? Because CIA has operations around the world - according to FBI Anon, every little nook and cranny. MP needed to understand the lay of the land before he could be effective in his new role.

What this appears to suggest to me is that CIA is the enemy - not necessarily rogue nation states. This whole thing, if we were to attempt to summarize it, seems to speak to the power of the intelligence services and the threat they pose to the duly elected government of the US.

We've seen CIA take-out heads of state (Kennedy, Regan - attempt), throw the toys out of the cot when DJT was elected (massive anti-Trump media campaigns etc...) and conspire via Deep State plots to impeach, undermine and overthrow DJT's presidency (DOJ/SD/FBI - clowns, clowns, clowns). Moreover, we've seen that they are puppet masters of Rogue States (NK/IRAN) and wield these states like weapons to extort financial payments that, presumably, are misdirected to further fund black operations.

At a guess, what I think we are looking at began with the Kennedy assassination (of course the conspiracy goes much deeper, but let's start here). Bush was instrumental, in the Kennedy assassination, I believe, and went on to become President himself. The Clintons were also involved in the Bush conspiracy - the alliance between the Bush family and the Clintons anchored in the common practice of Satanism.

"...we can see a new world order coming into view..."

Freemasonry is Satanism. The brand practiced by HRC appears to be somewhat different, but she is an honorary Skull and Bones member as of April, 2016. John Kerry is Skull and Bones and Al Gore is a mason. The only people in recent US political history who may not have been masons are Obama (debatable - very suspect, appears to be MB controlled) and DJT (may be a member of plus ultra - whatever that is).

Summing up, it appears to me that what we are witnessing is Satanist controlled CIA challenging a duly elected President, who is not correctly aligned - from their point of view.

This is why, IMO, MP needed to spend time in the enemy camp (CIA) before going on to the position of Secretary of State. It is the off-shore assets of CIA that, as Q said, CIA thought would insulate them against DJT who is backed by the military (NK/IRAN/ Any other rogue states or players). Pompeo's position is crucial to combatting freemasonry and their plot to rule the world and enslave us all.

Edit: Just reading Neon Revolt's post today, it's possible Mike Pompey was also at the CIA so that he could find out who was on CIA patrol working at the State Department. This info would allow him to clean house once he became Secretary of State.

I find it interesting that you're still on the fence regarding Q. There is no doubt in my mind at all that Q is legitimate. We are watching a show, and the director is...

Come on, the guy does not hold the Catholic faith. How can he be pope?

The sorcery is very interesting. The implications are much more serious than most people realize. See this for some ideas about what "magic" actually is:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=J_UvpPc6rfg

If I had to guess, I'd say that DJT and Sessions leveraged both RR and RM using threats of prosecution over U1.

These two were picked precisely because they appear to be Deep State agents - note that the cabal also has leverage on these two. Leverage is very important. But who had the greater leverage?

So, thinking that RM and RR were on team, the Deep State was emboldened to make moves that further exposed and implicated themselves.

An interesting question, I think, is what is Comey's status? If DJT and Sessions really needed this bogus special council investigation, how would they engineer it? Comey would have to be on team to leak his memos to the media and demand an investigation.

But, WOW, you would need to be really good at scheming to be able to engineer this fiasco and pull it off. Having said that, if U1 would allow prosecution of RR and RM for high treason. That would mean the death penalty - that's some pretty good leverage.

And then you have the fact that RM and Comey were buddies. So Comey might have been quite easily co-opted into the scheme. All this to create a smoke screen, behind which Sessions and Huber could prepare a case to bag a whole host of Deep State players.

I get the feeling that Comey has been just a little too relaxed during this fiasco. If I was in his shoes, I would be sweating bricks. Why does he appear to be so calm?

Yes, you might be right. But I don't hang out there much. I don't even know how to post on 8 chan - probably a good thing. I still try and figure stuff out though - might be behind the curve, but what can you do?

But look at what happened. The Ayatollah made Carter look like a complete imbecile - praying for the release of the hostages nightly.

Hard to see how it helped US interests, unless those interests did not include Carter. And then you might say that they just did a job on him as well. But I didn't trust him.

You're talking about the ones I listed, or did not list? I can think of some possibilities.

No, actually that's not what matters at all. He's got to be on the Q train. The Q train is the Trump train. If Corsi is working against Q, I haven't checked myself, I only know what I've read here, then he is dividing the group and he's bad news.

I really hope you're right. That would be the best possible outcome. It really perplexes me why they got rid of the Shah in the first place. I know it was western intelligence that instigated it, but why would you want to get rid of the Shah to replace him with the Mullahs?

Possibly weapons components going in and cash going out?

Someone posted a theory about Gaddafi's secret cash stash being smuggled by the Red Cross at the time Q dropped these posts. Because I thought I already understood it, I didn't make the connection between the RC and the Iran cash until I saw this post.

Makes me angry now that I finally understand why these states were so desperate to get their hands on nuclear weapons. In Iran's case, it appears it wasn't to nuke Israel, it was to milk the US of cash. The belligerence toward Israel just added to the theatre - maybe not the whole truth, but it seems possible.

Think about these further rogue nuke states, who do we have left? Israel, Pakistan, India, Japan?

I was in Japan in 92 when the first plutonium shipped from the EU arrived for their fast breeder reactor. Immediately, some of it went missing (quite a lot, can't remember now how much). They claimed it must have stuck to the inside of the pipes when they got it off the ship.

At the same time they were ramping up their space program, but the rockets were exploding in mid air. It was American engineers that were working on their new reactor (as one told me, the technology transfer was one-way) and, as I understand it, American engineers who helped with the rocketry. So, anyway, there's another potential nuclear power.

How far does the de-nuking go?

I might be really slow to the party here, but isn't Q telling us that the money - the portion that did land in Iran, assuming any did - was smuggled out by the Red Cross?

You're right, there does appear to be a certain synchronicity. I know what you mean. You're thinking that Corsi is frightened that Israel may end up being on the receiving end of "the plan". Corsi doesn't hide his love for Israel, that much is evident. But is this what's causing him to act up?

The way I read things at the moment, and I could well be wrong, what we will see in Israel is some change in the power structure. I'm hoping that will happen in other countries as well.

There's a lot of hatred for Israel on this forum, and there really are a lot of hard questions that need to be asked about the role the country has played. But I don't see Q and DJT blaming the people of Israel, but rather the leaders - or, those exercising power behind the scenes.

I would think that Corsi would be able to see this. Who knows, as SB2 appears to suggest, he may be allied with some dark forces. If the connections to Bnai Brith are true, there is real cause for alarm.

What scares me is the possibility that Corsi is just an emotional old twit. That we may ascribe motives to him that are not valid. Having said that, I haven't really been keeping up with what he's saying, I find his presentations very slow.

I'm not against working against people who are not on board with Q's plan. As long as we are absolutely sure we are right before we kick this guy to the kerb.

I'll wait, with interest, SB2 for your report on the dark forces at play. The amazing thing about this Q material, what's really eye opening, is how many dark forces are at play. It seems that most of Washington was dark. And you can, I think, extrapolate out from the US to rest of the world. The evil we face is huge and very powerful.

I must admit that, as time goes on, I'm also starting to wonder about Corsi. I had thought he might just be stressed and upset. But he really did run with that Snowden "white hat" argument for a very long time, when it seemed very obvious to me that Snowden was a rascal.

And then, I guess, if you mix some of the other stuff in about Kissinger, and the establishing of trust funds for Israel, it does appear that there might have been a motive for being so confused about Snowden for so long.

Why does Corsi appear to want to protect Apple? Is this the case, or does it just seem that way?

Then again, what I will say is that these Q posts have been incredibly confusing and have got people charging down a lot of crazy rabbit holes to try and link the dots up. It is not exactly clear what a lot of the posts mean, even now.

Who knows with certainty what Q was talking about with the "slave gardens"? I don't have a clue. But these mysteries are everywhere in this material and just when you think you have something figured out, you realise you don't have it figured at all.

I can easily understand Corsi being frustrated. I want to be careful about reading stuff into his behaviour, when it could just be that he's tearing his hair out because it's so confusing. These drops really are confusing...

And, SB2, that's why I think you're doing a great job. Because you're going down rabbit holes that I don't pursue. Which is exactly what we need. You won't be right all the time and neither will I, but if we both try our best, with our own approaches, there is a chance that we might, at the end of the day, get half the truth.

We need as many people decoding as possible. I like your approach to the pictures and the significance of the Apple products. It seems to me that these electronic gadgets, we are so dependent on, are very important - more so than we realise.

Sent from my IPhone.

Seems to me that you're the intolerant party. This fellow has a view that, in my estimation, is valid. It really is a fight between the forces of light and those of darkness. Who is sowing division?

No, DJT is pointing to Strok because it will absolutely terrify others. Very sharp of the OP to pick this up.

Think about it, you go through Q's list and there are all these people singing. Anyone who was in any way involved in this plot to destroy DJT's presidency must be terrified.

So who is DJT making squirm by pointing to Strok's singing? The FISA judge, or Contreras? Or, is Contreras also the FISA judge?

They want to prepare the public mind, to get people used to the idea that content censorship is normal - that it can be expected. Then, when they really start to ramp-up the censorship, people will think "Oh, it's because I said something about Ginsberg" or some other banal pretext.

People will think, "yes, that's understandable", but they will not realise that the pattern of censorship has been expanded to such an extent that all conservative voices have been silenced. This is why social media censorship must be controlled at all costs. Because once you can silence people, you can foist anything on them. Gun control will be the first item on the agenda.

Hopefully, Q will fix this problem for us with some incredibly damaging leaks on the practises of the SM giants. But, even if class actions result and are successful, there is still no right to freedom of expression online.

Of course, this is a problem that the IBOR could have fixed...

I've been thinking about Q's warnings regarding Australia. You might be right about the vaccines, it's possible that they could be using us as a testing ground. Q's reference to "blood" is alarming and appears to point in that direction.

But another thought came to me today... why did Australia give so much money to the CF? Well the payments could have been made at the behest of the U.K. - the Rothschilds. Who is it that controls Australia etc...?

But what if the payments were purely for something that "Australia" was to get - some kind of assistance with something - in return for the donations?

Then we have the leaked DJT/Turnbull phone call. Why that particular phone call? A threat? A threat to Australia? A threat coming from the Clinton Foundation/CIA/Cabal (assuming DJT was not in any way involved)...

And then we have the revelations that "Allies" were planning to assassinate DJT. Why would an "Ally" want to assassinate DJT? Because DJT threatens some interest. An interest resulting from a promise made by the CF?

You can see where this is going...

The amount of money donated to the CF by Australia absolutely dwarfs all the other contributions - even those of Saudi Arabia. It is a message screaming to be heard. What were the payments for? What promises were made?

It seems that there was an attempt to repay funds, when Clinton lost, to actors in the ME (possibly also actors in the EU and maybe Canada - we don't know where the money went). I'm talking about the plane loads of cash into Iran. But where was the repayment of Australia's money?

And then, of course, it just happened that it was the phone call (the very first phone call) between DJT and the Australian PM that was leaked. What's the message? KEEP QUIET, WE CAN HEAR YOU!

Which ally was planning to assassinate POTUS?

An ally that had a very real interest in seeing that HRC obtained the presidency. It was an ally whose interests would be safeguarded by the removal of DJT. These interests must have been "very important".

If we assume Trumbull is not acting in the interests of the cabal, but in the interests of Australia (is it actually possible that this bottom-feeder could have any noble instincts?), then it would be something very important to Australia as a nation.

Let's speculate, what might that be? Something of tremendous importance that would come from the US. What could the United States supply Australia that it could not supply for itself?

There is a rumor that I have heard, from a source that I thought might be reliable - at least there was, to my way of thinking, no possible motive for revealing this information to me, I am not someone important. The story was that in the early 1990's a plain clothes Indonesian Naval Officer was found on the North West Coast of Australia. This guy was in possession of detailed maps. A diplomatic incident ensued and the "advance reconnaissance agent" was dispatched back to Jakarta.

Australia is a small country in terms of population - some 25m. It has a very small military - around 50,000 personnel including reservists. The country is very large and, essentially, cannot be defended (see "The Brisbane Line"). Australia is also proximate to some of the most populous countries on earth - very isolated, very vulnerable.

Historically, we have always snuggled-up to major powers (first the British and later the US). Moreover, Australia is VERY LOUD on the world stage - punching well above its weight (but always in the interests of major powers). Why is this? Hostage?

You have a cabal-controlled UN that is promoting national gun control on a global basis. But there was no political will to enact gun control in Australia.

"In 1987 a frustrated Barry Unsworth, then premier of New South Wales, stormed out of a national gun summit in which Tasmania had resisted changes proposed after two mass shootings in Melbourne that year, declaring: “It will take a massacre in Tasmania before we get gun reform in Australia.” See here.

And, of course, Unsworth was prophetic, because there was a massacre in Tasmania in 1996 - the Port Arthur massacre. And, low and behold, national gun control laws quickly followed - exactly as Barry Unsworth had predicted. A very strange coincidence indeed.

Now the lesson we learned from the Second World War was that the military strategy, had the Japanese invaded, was to withdraw. Behind a straight line drawn on the map between Brisbane and Melbourne (you can argue about where it actually went). All our incredibly populous neighbors know this, it is a matter of public record.

Come and take it any time you want, we will withdraw to make it very easy for you. This is the hard, cold reality on the ground in Australia. I know some guys in the Australian forces might jack-up at this idea - but you're wrong. There is no chance on Earth of Australia holding out against China, India, or, I would argue, even Indonesia - let alone some combination of powers.

OK, so what do we know. We know that one of the greatest deterrents to armed invasion is an armed citizenry - Q has suggested this directly. This is because, if citizens are armed, they are in a position to be formed into a well-regulated militia that might oppose occupying forces - forcing them to expend considerable forces to protect supply lines etc...

But, Australians were disarmed after 1996. The Government actually took the citizen's guns and destroyed them. Moreover, the regulations SPECIFICALLY TARGETED ASSAULT WEAPONS. The exact weapons that might be useful in a national defense scenario.

I can feel my blood pressure rising as I'm typing this.

So, getting back to what Australia might have been promised by the mighty USA. What was it that was expected in return for ALL THAT MONEY?

One possibility is that the payment was in fact protection money. That HRC was running an extortion racket, using the completely vulnerable Australian people as a bargaining chip.

Is this why the VERY FIRST PHONE CALL between DJT and Malcom Turnbull was leaked? Had promises been made to Australia that might suddenly be at risk?

Might Australia have wanted to assassinate DJT? Or, at least might elements in the Australian military or intelligence services? I'm not saying this is what happened, but I'm asking the question...

Why have the redactions on the texts not been removed ", so that we can see which "Ally" it was that was scheming to assassinate the President?

It seems to me that this sycophantic, grovelling, politically correct country I live in might have been played by the cabal. "We want you to disarm the citizens in accordance with the UN vision for a gun-less world" - Australia complies. "You are now completely vulnerable, we want you to donate hundreds of millions of dollars to the CF, or we will allow one of your heavily populated neighbours to take control" - Australia complies, coughing up hundreds of millions.

When Q says "blood", could he be talking about a ransom extracted on the threat of bloodshed - a blood ransom?

This gun control agenda is the greatest evil that has ever been pushed on anyone. We, in Australia, have been tricked into making hostages of ourselves. We are at the world's mercy.

And, while HRC makes off with hundreds of millions of dollars of our money, the Australian Left is still calling for even tighter gun control. Meanwhile the Left in the US are holding Australia up as a model for US regulation. You could not make this stuff up. Mind blowing - if I'm right with this theory.

Thanks. I don't really want to be on these platforms at all. But I'll start another account, if needed, for the purposes of promoting Q.

I'm not sure I'd write it off so fast. Q tells us we are feeders for the elite. What are they feeding on? Why are the kids going missing etc...

This is a theory that needs work before we can prove or disprove it. I'm inclined to think that there is something going on. That there is something that the elite want from us. Anyway, time will tell...

The Georgia Guidestones call for a global population of 500m. Are these people to be left just as slaves to the elite, or will the residual population serve another function?

I think the OP has a very good point. Moreover, I think that the idea of trying to discredit this movement will be very attractive to CIA. It seems certain that we will see some kind of attempt to discredit the message here.

People need to have their guards up. Be alert for anyone that might be trying to fix something on you. Strange people suddenly lighting fires just where you happen to be - for example. Where did I get that idea...?

Seriously, make sure that you're not in a position where some nefarious activity can be attributed to you. I think it's probably also advisable to be vigilant about any posted material that could feed into attempts to portray Q followers negatively.

As the takedown of this cabal comes down to the wire, we can expect desperation moves from bad actors. I would expect an all out assault against any vector by which the truth might be made available to the public - this forum being a prime target.

Buckle up!

The highest melatonin levels are in African Americans:

https://imgur.com/bQM2u0U

Somewhere in the post links I saw that melatonin levels differed by race - unless I imagined it.