The Qanon posts, and associated US political analysis

[edina]

Perhaps its time to refresh people's memory on the events happening last October, regarding the connections of the Las Vegas shootings and Saudi Arabia.

And Q's earlier posts regarding the Saudi Purge.

What do you think?

Or is it just a loss of forward momentum on the emerging current events?

[Valerie Villars]

This may seem way off base and maybe it is offbase. I don't know. I DO know that back in 2013 I received downloads of information that were overwhelming and confusing.

At the time, I knew nothing of the corruption and Q wasn't even online.

However, almost all of the code names, etc. used by Q now, were part of the information I received. That alone is enough to make me pay attention. After all, those downloads were what started me going down the rabbit hole and I can't discount it. It was just a knowing.

[mgray]

I found these questions most interesting. Of all the points of constitutional law to bring up to question him on the application of military law as it pertains to enemy combatants was most telling.

[waves]

Posted by KiwiElf (here)

Posted by waves (here)
Compelling argument for who Q is/has been. If true, I'm not sure what to think about the dichotomy if really not a Trump or military insider - the enormous positives in terms of awareness raising and getting people to talk and connect dots... in the same place as what would then be very repetitive false hope and cult cultivating aspects.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=LZv0_ZT50Oc

Current top comment under this video:

"I used to think Qanon was a LARP until I started actually following Qanon and verifying all of the "Q proofs" for myself. It's statistically impossible for Qanon to be a LARP and those insisting it is without actually following Q is doing a disservice to other truthers. The fact that the liberal fakestream propaganda media has invested so much time and resources into trying to deter people from following Qanon, just makes me believe in its legitimacy even more. Don't just take anyone's word for it, check it out for yourself!"

Nyah nyah nyah nyah take that? Completely ignoring my non-critical comment or the actual point of the video - the evidence for Q's identity(s)?

To respond to that video with that and nothing else - which has zero to do with any of the content - feels like a rush to cherrypick a comment against it without even watching.

That behavior even supports what else the video is about. The narrator is noticing the rush-to-defend-one's-blind-belief cultish behavior Q followers are exhibiting.

I'm still in observation not belief, just watching and/or offering puzzle pieces, and I pointed out the truly great positives despite the possible deceit.

Again, I thought the evidence in the early part of the video pointed out reasonable evidence concerning Brower and the significance of the moment Q's posts changed from 4chan to 8chan and I find Kev to be one of the more agenda-less hosts not easily convinced but open-minded.

[Valerie Villars]

Posted by mgray (here)
I found these questions most interesting. Of all the points of constitutional law to bring up to question him on the application of military law as it pertains to enemy combatants was most telling.

Yes, I did find it quite invigorating, as per your linked article. I felt like someone actually cared about this country, the law and it's people.

[Foxie Loxie]

..."observation, not belief"....I like that phrase, waves!

I've been down the Belief Road with a religion, so do not go down that road anymore! I don't have to "believe in Q" to be just observing the phenomenon. I have great respect for those who have been keeping us updated on the "goings on" related thereto. Thank you!

There is no need for us to attack each other personally; for me....this seems to be one of the more "sane" places left in this crazy world...let's keep it that way!

[Michelle Marie]

Posted by Foxie Loxie (here)
..."observation, not belief"....I like that phrase, waves!

I've been down the Belief Road with a religion, so do not go down that road anymore! I don't have to "believe in Q" to be just observing the phenomenon. I have great respect for those who have been keeping us updated on the "goings on" related thereto. Thank you!

There is no need for us to attack each other personally; for me....this seems to be one of the more "sane" places left in this crazy world...let's keep it that way!

Thank you, Foxie Loxie (and waves) about the observation perspective. Combine that with Valerie Villars intuitive downloads and that inner feeling of knowing, and we get discernment.

Furthermore, I'm practicing focusing on intentions and inspired action and taking responsibility for actively participating in the forward, good willed momentum. I guess it's kind of like that saying, be the change you want to see in the world.

I'm practicing the principles in the Genius Rising: The Science of Consciousness thread.
https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...=1#post1245230
And I pray and meditate. I feel the spirit behind things, and when people work together to uncover the truth, I feel the spirit of cooperation. That's the feeling I get on this thread and on this forum when we share what we have learned and the sources of that information.

We're not victims; we are creators. This all has purpose. I'm just grateful for using this experience to become better and express my highest potential. I'm authentic and sincere as I express these ideas. They are from my heart.

Some things are potential puzzle pieces, while others are documented facts. Mixed in with all of that we have opinions and speculation. There are a lot of good ideas to sift through. And some, not so good. But truth is always good. And we can face that head on.

That's why I like the documentation the best. Clues can lead to documentation. I don't like to interpret or speculate as much as I like to put what things surface as documented facts together. There's sort of a structure being built with these facts...it's the whole truth that is coming to the light of our awareness.

I'm really looking forward to the documentation that is due to come out tomorrow (from the Weaponization of the intelligence community thread). That's going to take a lot of guessing and speculation out of the puzzle and piece together the truth.
https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...=1#post1245971

So, observation and inner knowing IS where science and spirituality meet, and that's where we find that common ground on this forum. At least, that is my perspective.

All the best to all!
MM

[Bill Ryan]

Posted by Jayke (here)

Posted by Dennis Leahy (here)
"q said":
Free Iran!!!
Fight
Fight
Fight
Regime change.
People have the power.
We stand with you.
Q.

I guess those words have different connotations to different generations. My generation didn’t have as an extensive commie-vision indoctrination that the senior generation has had to shake off.

My interpretation of the Q-post above, which I assumed to be self-evident given the context of the Q-drops:

Free Iran!!! (Keep Iran free from the Ziocons who want to initiate a pretext for regime change in Iran)
Fight, fight, fight (resist)
Regime change (resist the nonsense propoganda pushed by the mainstream media who are advocating regime change in Iran)
People have power (truth is more powerful than than the lies fed by mainstream media)
We stand with you (we stand with truth)

~~~

It might have been intended to mean:

Fight fight fight regime change.

And of course, I'd support that. We very probably all would.

But you see, here's the problem. In the many explanations offered on this thread since Dennis raised the question, no-one proposed that interpretation. I had to come up with it myself.

But, proposal of interpretations shouldn't be necessary. Talk about a recipe for conflict, group-splitting and time-wasting.

You see, folks, this is a one-way mirror. There's no-one to interview, no-one to ask for clarification or more info, no-one's credentials or background to check.

No provenance, no documentation, not even (as in the famous 1988 UFO Cover-up Live Condor-Falcon mystery) a silhouetted male head and a disguised voice on a documentary film.

One might be forgiven for suspecting that the effect on the community is intended. Anyone who wanted to be clear, would be clear.

Who might want to generate

• passion
• hope
• belief
• tens of millions of person-hours of unproductive time
  
• division
• argument between friends?
  

[norman]

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)

Posted by Jayke (here)

Posted by Dennis Leahy (here)
"q said":
Free Iran!!!
Fight
Fight
Fight
Regime change.
People have the power.
We stand with you.
Q.

I guess those words have different connotations to different generations. My generation didn’t have as an extensive commie-vision indoctrination that the senior generation has had to shake off.

My interpretation of the Q-post above, which I assumed to be self-evident given the context of the Q-drops:

Free Iran!!! (Keep Iran free from the Ziocons who want to initiate a pretext for regime change in Iran)
Fight, fight, fight (resist)
Regime change (resist the nonsense propoganda pushed by the mainstream media who are advocating regime change in Iran)
People have power (truth is more powerful than than the lies fed by mainstream media)
We stand with you (we stand with truth)

~~~

It might have been intended to mean:

Fight fight fight regime change.

And of course, I'd support that. We very probably all would.

But you see, here's the problem. In the many explanations offered on this thread since Dennis raised the question, no-one proposed that interpretation. I had to come up with it myself.

But, proposal of interpretations shouldn't be necessary. Talk about a recipe for conflict, group-splitting and time-wasting.

You see, folks, this is a one-way mirror. There's no-one to interview, no-one to ask for clarification or more info, no-one's credentials or background to check.

No provenance, no documentation, not even (as in the famous 1988 UFO Cover-up Live Condor-Falcon mystery) a silhouetted male head and a disguised voice on a documentary film.

One might be forgiven for suspecting that the effect on the community is intended. Anyone who wanted to be clear, would be clear.

Who might want to generate

• passion
• hope
• belief
• tens of millions of person-hours of unproductive time
  
• division
• argument between friends?
  

Of course, there's the other way of looking at it.



What you are asking for is for Q to shoot himself in the foot and give power to his enemies to mess with him.


While we may or may not need proof of who he is, his enemies definitely need proof of who he is. Are we going to hand that to them on a plate ?


I'll just keep on tracking the Q crumbs and look for signs that something good is happening. I hope the CNN types don't ever find out who he is. Imagine the mess that would unleash.

[enigma3]

What I see here is a war unlike any war that has ever been fought before. That in itself creates cognitive dissonance big time. Because this "war" is being fought largely behind the scenes, we cannot see it outright. that causes frustration, which is a theme here. Frustration because it is not being played out right in front of our eyes.

Before the big drops come the stage must be prepared. Otherwise the plan may fail due to lack of preparation. What is that preparation? Slow releases of damnable intelligence that will make people think twice about putting Hillary or Hussein, etc, on a pedestal. If the ground under your feet begins to feel a little mushy because your cherished paradigm has been dented you may just listen to the big drops without such accumulated bias. That is happening now albeit at a faster pace. Good cooking is 80% preparation.

The other major factor is that, as Q has stated, the good guys have to adhere to the law. And the law does not allow for the release of classified information, as most of this is. So the Q team must tread lightly in what information is released, what format is used and how much is released at any given time. Thus we have "bread crumbs" and the much used phrase - you already have more than you need.

The rules of the game are new here. We are truly in uncharted territory. I have read all the MegaAnon and Q posts. It is my understanding that this is a plan that has been upwards of 10 years in the making. The white hats are attempting to bring down the Deep State using the Deep State playbook where things are done totally behind the scenes. Example: I believe it was a study from Stanford released about 3 years ago which empirically stated that since 1970, and factoring in inflation, the average worker's salary in the US has gone up $56!!! since 1970. Let that one bake awhile. The Deep Staters have dumbed down wages for almost 50 years now. And done completely behind the scenes. Using the Fed and Congress to do their dirty work. As usual, we don't get to know that until after the fact. Q, and the rest of the "team" are turning the playbook back on them! With as little sabre rattling and loss of life as they can manage. Brilliant.

For the doubters, just dig into any number of events that have transpired since Q has begun posting. Take the missile launch from Ketron Island hoping to take down Air Force 1. Look into the details and the response. Classic Deep State war games vs the white hats. Fascinating. Look into the slow motion purge of the FBI and DOJ. Classic. The flyover of Trump's golf course in Scotland and the White hats response sending a plane to Little Rock. Classic. When I talk to Hillary supporters or those who do not follow Q, they have NO idea those bad actors were purged en masse or that Skull and Bones did the Scotland caper.

This is truly an attempt to do what JFK tried to do and failed. The Deep Staters should have known the war was on as soon as Adm Mike Rogers went to Trump Tower to brief the Trump team on the FISA spying 3 days after the election. Bold and gutsy are not strong enough words to describe the coup. We are witnessing the most brazen, calculated political act I have seen in my many years walking this planet. History in the making. We are now close to the first big reveal - the unredacted IG report, right in front of our eyes, on the FISA abuses. My hat is off to them, my prayers are with them. May they be successful beyond my wildest speculations. What a time to be alive!

[Bill Ryan]

Posted by norman (here)
What you are asking for is for Q to shoot himself in the foot and give power to his enemies to mess with him.

While we may or may not need proof of who he is, his enemies definitely need proof of who he is. Are we going to hand that to them on a plate ?

Norman, do you really think that the NSA doesn't know every detail of his/her/their life, every minute of every day?

[norman]

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)

Posted by norman (here)
What you are asking for is for Q to shoot himself in the foot and give power to his enemies to mess with him.

While we may or may not need proof of who he is, his enemies definitely need proof of who he is. Are we going to hand that to them on a plate ?

Norman, do you really think that the NSA doesn't know every detail of his/her/their life, every minute of every day?

Yes, the NSA knows everything but a good question would be who's side are they on, these days. According to Q, the NSA is firmly with Trump.

[Satori]

Posted by Valerie Villars (here)

Posted by mgray (here)
I found these questions most interesting. Of all the points of constitutional law to bring up to question him on the application of military law as it pertains to enemy combatants was most telling.

Yes, I did find it quite invigorating, as per your linked article. I felt like someone actually cared about this country, the law and it's people.

I did not get the impression that Graham's questions along those lines were meant to assure us that only the swamp critters will be the ones subject to military tribunals. I may be wrong, but I got the sense that he was exploring whether Kavanaugh would rule in favor of upholding the decisions of military tribunals regardless of who might be subjected to such procedures. Or, is Kavanaugh opposed to military tribunals for non-military persons, i.e., civilians, in favor of the more traditional criminal law process where theoretically all constitutional protections apply to the accused.

That is, Graham was exploring whether Kavanaugh would rule against the decisions of any military tribunal asserting criminal jurisdiction over any non-military personnel purely on the ground that he believes that such jurisdiction is unconstitutional as a matter of law?

In my experience, it can be difficult to accurately predict what any judge or Justice (so-called) will do until an actual case and controversy comes before them and they make a decision.

So, what I'm saying is that military tribunals will not be just for the swamp critters. Once you open that "Box of Pandoras", its open.

[norman]

Posted by enigma3 (here)




. . . . It is my understanding that this is a plan that has been upwards of 10 years in the making. . . . .

I think it's been banged around with and shelved and reworked for several decades.


It makes sense that it had to get this dangerously close to the endgame for all the evidence and incrimination to become clear enough to have clout in the process of nailing them.

[Valerie Villars]

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)

Posted by norman (here)
What you are asking for is for Q to shoot himself in the foot and give power to his enemies to mess with him.

While we may or may not need proof of who he is, his enemies definitely need proof of who he is. Are we going to hand that to them on a plate ?

Norman, do you really think that the NSA doesn't know every detail of his/her/their life, every minute of every day?

This reminds me of something my cousin's husband said. He has been in Naval Intelligence for a long time. I think he retired not too long ago, but he was stationed overseas in Italy. We were at his wife's dad's funeral.

My other cousin asked about the NSA and he said "Do you really think the NSA has time to track every person?" And "We have to get Trump out of office."

It made me wonder just who's side he was on.

I also remember Mark Passio, a former satanist saying that though he didn't agree with their philosophy's any more, that he had great respect for the fact they are extremely well organized and cohesive.

I think we are seeing the white hat version of organization and cohesion. IMO of course.

[edina]

Posted by Satori (here)

Posted by Valerie Villars (here)

Posted by mgray (here)
I found these questions most interesting. Of all the points of constitutional law to bring up to question him on the application of military law as it pertains to enemy combatants was most telling.

Yes, I did find it quite invigorating, as per your linked article. I felt like someone actually cared about this country, the law and it's people.

I did not get the impression that Graham's questions along those lines were meant to assure us that only the swamp critters will be the ones subject to military tribunals. I may be wrong, but I got the sense that he was exploring whether Kavanaugh would rule in favor of upholding the decisions of military tribunals regardless of who might be subjected to such procedures. Or, is Kavanaugh opposed to military tribunals for non-military persons, i.e., civilians, in favor of the more traditional criminal law process where theoretically all constitutional protections apply to the accused.

That is, Graham was exploring whether Kavanaugh would rule against the decisions of any military tribunal asserting criminal jurisdiction over any non-military personnel purely on the ground that he believes that such jurisdiction is unconstitutional as a matter of law?

In my experience, it can be difficult to accurately predict what any judge or Justice (so-called) will do until an actual case and controversy comes before them and they make a decision.

So, what I'm saying is that military tribunals will not be just for the swamp critters. Once you open that "Box of Pandoras", its open.

I felt Lindsey Graham's military law questions and statements was about less probing into Brett Kavanuagh's position and more about making a statement on the public record under the guise of asking questions. Lindsay Graham made it quite clear throughout his hearing that he supported Brett Kavanaugh's confirmation to the Supreme Court. He alluded to how the behavior expressed by others in the hearing is not the norm.

But, this statement from him, seemed to me to be the crux of what he wanted to accomplish with that line of questioning.

LG: So if anybody doubts, there's a long-standing history in this country that your constitutional rights follow you wherever you go but you don't have a constitutional right to turn on your own government, and collaborate with the enemy of the nation. You'll be treated differently. What's the name of the case, if you can recall, that reaffirmed the concept that you could hold one of our own is an enemy combatant if they were engaged in terrorist activities in Afghanistan, are you familiar with that case ?
BK: Yeah, Hamdi. (Hamdi v Rumsfeld)
LG: Okay. So the bottom line is, on every American citizen; know you have constitutional rights but you do not have a constitutional right to collaborate with the enemy. There's a body of law well developed long before 9/11 that understood the difference between basic criminal law and the Law Of Armed Conflict (LOAC) pdf. Do you understand those differences?
BK: I do understand that they're different bodies of law, of course, Senator.

When he made these statements he was no longer looking at Brett Kavanaugh, he was addressing the broader audience.

This statement, in effect, brought these points into the public record, and public awareness.

This would be the "what". As to his intent, the "why" he did this, that's open for speculation.

[TargeT]

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)

Posted by norman (here)
What you are asking for is for Q to shoot himself in the foot and give power to his enemies to mess with him.

While we may or may not need proof of who he is, his enemies definitely need proof of who he is. Are we going to hand that to them on a plate ?

Norman, do you really think that the NSA doesn't know every detail of his/her/their life, every minute of every day?

I think your over estimating (or perhaps, underestimating Q?) the NSA.

They do "snort" up all comms, filtering and processing those is a far far different matter... (very difficult to sort through exabytes of data)

Plus one of the hardest things to do in Incident Response (threat hunting, pen testing etc..) is attribution... which means it's very easy to hide where you source from if you try to do it, especially if your jumping through non-extradition countries, or countries like Brazil that have next to zero "cyber" laws.

Posted by edina (here)

LG: So if anybody doubts, there's a long-standing history in this country that your constitutional rights follow you wherever you go but you don't have a constitutional right to turn on your own government, and collaborate with the enemy of the nation. You'll be treated differently. What's the name of the case, if you can recall, that reaffirmed the concept that you could hold one of our own is an enemy combatant if they were engaged in terrorist activities in Afghanistan, are you familiar with that case ?
BK: Yeah, Hamdi. (Hamdi v Rumsfeld)
LG: Okay. So the bottom line is, on every American citizen; know you have constitutional rights but you do not have a constitutional right to collaborate with the enemy. There's a body of law well developed long before 9/11 that understood the difference between basic criminal law and the Law Of Armed Conflict (LOAC) pdf. Do you understand those differences?
BK: I do understand that they're different bodies of law, of course, Senator.

When he made these statements he was no longer looking at Brett Kavanaugh, he was addressing the broader audience.

This statement, in effect, brought these points into the public record, and public awareness.

This would be the "what". As to his intent, the "why" he did this, that's open for speculation.

That was my take as well.

[edina]

The unsung heroes in this saga, because it's not been brought into public awareness, but the people who follow Q know, are Admiral Rogers and General Flynn.

They wrestled control of the NSA from the criminal elements of the Deep State. And this has made all the difference.

It's why Trump is still alive, for example.

In addition to Q, almost every Deep State insider (whistle blower) has talked about this.

[edina]

The value of having an awareness of the two distinct bodies of law, and of the particular questioning by Lindsey Graham is that as events unfold we have a deeper understanding of the underlying processes.

This information is not being covered by the so-called Free Press. Many people will feel blind-sided if they begin seeing the people they are being told to trust going to jail and being prosecuted, possibly under military law, for treason and such.

Dave Janda has specifically name John Brennan, as an example.

It's helpful to have this information under your belt, or in the side pocket of your mind. If for no other reason than your own sanity.
And possibly, to help others with their sanity. The cognitive disconnect for some people may very well be mind-blowing.

[edina]

Posted by TargeT (here)

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)

Posted by norman (here)
What you are asking for is for Q to shoot himself in the foot and give power to his enemies to mess with him.

While we may or may not need proof of who he is, his enemies definitely need proof of who he is. Are we going to hand that to them on a plate ?

Norman, do you really think that the NSA doesn't know every detail of his/her/their life, every minute of every day?

I think your over estimating (or perhaps, underestimating Q?) the NSA.

They do "snort" up all comms, filtering and processing those is a far far different matter... (very difficult to sort through exabytes of data)

Plus one of the hardest things to do in Incident Response (threat hunting, pen testing etc..) is attribution... which means it's very easy to hide where you source from if you try to do it, especially if your jumping through non-extradition countries, or countries like Brazil that have next to zero "cyber" laws.

One of points that comes to mind as I read this is that earlier this summer there was the discussion of getting the "keystone" from the Queen. This seemed to be related to Snowden in some way.

This seemed to be the cipher or code that the Queen used to control others. Algorithm. I'm trying to find the posts that talk about this. (I'll post it/them here when I find them.)

It seems this is now in the hands of the Q-Team, the people associated with Admiral Mike Rogers. And why they have leverage over the "bad"/"criminal" actors in the UK.