|
Posted on 02/28/2026 9:49:45 PM PST by ransomnote
Many come here to read dispatches from the War between Good and Evil, to red-pill and encourage.....and to pray and give thanks to the God who fights for us.
Q has reminded us repeatedly that together, we are strong. As the false "narrative" is destroyed and the divisive machinery put in place by the Deep State fails, the fact that patriotism has no skin color or political party is exposed for all to see.
3038 Mar 12, 2019 2:55:14 PM EDT
Q !!mG7VJxZNCI ID: 4fe510 No. 5643022>Decide for yourself (be free from outside opinion).
>Decide for yourself (be objective in your conclusions).
>Decide for yourself (be true in your own beliefs).
>Decide for yourself (be open to following the facts).
>Decide for yourself (be strong in defending your beliefs).
>Decide for yourself (be resistant to blindly accepting fact-less statements).
>Decide for yourself (be free)
Those who attack you.
Those who mock you.
Those who cull you.
Those who control you.
Those who label you.
Do they represent you?
Or, do they represent themselves (in some form)?
Mental Enslavement.
The Great Awakening ('Freedom of Thought’), was designed and created not only as a backchannel to the public (away from the longstanding ‘mind’ control of the corrupt & heavily biased media) to endure future events through transparency and regeneration of individual thought (breaking the chains of ‘group-think’), but, more importantly, aid in the construction of a vehicle (a ‘ship’) that provides the scattered (‘free thinkers’) with a ‘starter’ new social-networking platform which allows for freedom of thought, expression, and patriotism or national pride (the feeling of love, devotion and sense of attachment to a homeland and alliance with other citizens who share the same sentiment).
When ‘non-dogmatic’ information becomes FREE & TRANSPARENT it becomes a threat to those who attempt to control the narrative and/or the stable.
When you are awake, you stand on the outside of the stable (‘group-think’ collective), and have ‘free thought’.
"Free thought" is a philosophical viewpoint which holds that positions regarding truth should be formed on the basis of logic, reason, and empiricism, rather than authority, tradition, revelation, or dogma.
When you are awake, you are able to clearly see.
The choice is yours, and yours alone.
Trust and put faith in yourself.
You are not alone and you are not in the minority.
Difficult truths will soon see the light of day.
WWG1WGA!!!Q
In the battle between those who strip us our constitutional rights, we can't afford to let false divisions separate us any longer. We, and our country, will be forever made stronger by diligently seeking the truth, independence and freedom of thought.
Where We Go 1, We Go All
ACK ACK I posted on the old thread! I’m going to put on the new thread.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I thought it was because Festival is so deserted we're getting echoes.
I actually do sing out loud a lot. I’ve reported here on occasion that I sing when I’m alone in my car.
I didn’t mention it, but the reason my discovery freaked me out a bit is that I’ve been asked/coerced into giving bridge lessons to a group of intermediate players at my bridge club. I have no experience doing this and have to create the lessons from scratch, which is a TON of work. Our membership has many retired teachers and several who are the same calibre of player as I am, and one who is beyond me, but none want to teach bridge. So I’ve been stressed about researching the material and developing good lesson material and THEN I discovered I have this weird thing with my voice.
I had my mini-meltdown, I found a solution, and now I just have to get down to business so I can do my part to help develop the newer players before they get frustrated and leave the game. I was kind of hoping I’d have more time to fix my quirk before having to speak in public again but it is what it is. I’ll be fine.
A guy gotta try.
lol! We understand and love and respect the heck out of you guys for your persistence and courage.
Reminder to pray at 3:15 Eastern.
So many things to pray for, but
especially our nation and FRens.
Let us examine our ways and
test them, and let us return
to the LORD.
Lam. 3:40
[”He describes an end scenario that goes far beyond shifting power between countries, warning of “the utter demolition of the United States… and then the eventual merger of all the nations… into a single global system.”]
As long as the military chain of command doesn’t fall to DemonRats or the DS this, is just not more than a single digit probability. Recent events haven’t just demonstrated we’ve “got a good large military and know how to use it”, they’ve demonstrated we have amazing powers and could beat the rest of the globe with one figurative arm tied behind our back. Civilians/retired/reserve units could cover unrest on the home front. Nothing moves on water on this planet if we don’t want it to, and we could weather economic collapse while much of the rest of the world would go stone age.
Perhaps these lists could be broken up into two or even three postings.
How about 1 every 15 mins.
That ok, LJ?
:)
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
https://x.com/PrometheanActn/status/2045556406007283753
At 5:27 in the linked video, Kokinda stated that prior to October 7, Netanyahu's government funded Hamas. I asked Grok if there was proof of this statement. Here's Grok's response:
Evidence on the Statement: “Before October 7, Netanyahu's government actually funded Hamas through Qatar”
Yes, there is substantial evidence for this statement. Multiple credible Israeli and international news outlets, along with detailed reporting, confirm that under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s governments (particularly from 2018 onward), Israel explicitly approved, facilitated, and at times actively encouraged Qatar to transfer hundreds of millions of dollars to Hamas-controlled Gaza.
This was not direct Israeli taxpayer funding, but Netanyahu’s government enabled the flow of Qatari cash (often in suitcases carried through Israeli crossings) knowing it would sustain the Hamas government in Gaza.
Key Facts from Reporting
- The policy in action: Starting in 2018, Qatar began sending monthly payments (initially around $15–30 million) into Gaza for civil servant salaries, fuel for the power plant, and humanitarian aid. Israel’s security cabinet approved this, and the cash was delivered with Israeli coordination. Over roughly a decade, Qatar sent more than $1 billion total, with Israel’s blessing.
- Strategic rationale: Netanyahu’s governments saw the money as a way to keep Gaza calm (“quiet for quiet”), prevent a humanitarian collapse, and maintain the split between Hamas in Gaza and the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank — blocking any unified Palestinian push for statehood negotiations. Israeli officials, including Mossad directors, met with Qatari counterparts to ensure payments continued.
- Continued right up to October 7: In September 2023 (just weeks before the attack), Israeli officials reportedly asked Qatar to increase funding after Hamas threatened escalation. Mossad chief David Barnea, acting on government instructions, confirmed Israel wanted the money to keep flowing.
- Israeli admissions and criticism: Outlets like The Times of Israel and Haaretz have reported extensively on this. Even some of Netanyahu’s own former ministers and security officials criticized it as propping up Hamas. Post-October 7 investigations noted that Qatari funds helped Hamas build its military capabilities.
Netanyahu’s Position
Netanyahu has repeatedly called claims that he “strategically propped up” Hamas “ridiculous,” insisting the policy was only to avoid a humanitarian disaster in Gaza and was supported by Israel’s security establishment at the time. He has denied that the Qatari money directly financed the October 7 attacks.
In short, the video’s phrasing is a common shorthand used even in mainstream Israeli media for a well-documented policy of enabling Qatari financial support to the Hamas regime in Gaza. The evidence is extensive and not disputed on the core facts — only on the intent and ultimate consequences.
This is a clean HTML conversion of the previous response for easy viewing or sharing.
The claim that Hamas initially portrayed itself as a humanitarian conduit and that Netanyahu (or Israel) trusted them primarily refers to the early-to-mid 2010s through the launch of the major Qatari cash policy in 2018, with the core “misunderstanding” or strategic gamble most associated with the period 2012–2021 (especially intensifying in 2018 onward).
Hamas was founded in 1987 with a dual structure — social/welfare services (dawa) alongside its military wing. In its very early years, some Israeli officials tolerated its charitable networks as a counterweight to the secular PLO/Fatah. However, by the 1990s–2000s, Hamas was clearly designated a terrorist organization.
Qatar began sending modest funds to Gaza. Qatar positioned much of this as humanitarian aid (salaries, fuel, infrastructure). Israel was aware, but the amounts were limited. Some officials viewed Hamas’s governance role as potentially moderating its behavior or at least making it responsible for stability (“quiet for quiet”).
This is when the formalized Qatari payments ramped up significantly — monthly cash suitcases ($15–30 million initially, totaling over $1 billion by 2023), approved by Netanyahu’s security cabinet. Israel coordinated delivery through its crossings. The stated rationale was humanitarian: preventing economic collapse in Gaza, paying salaries, and avoiding unrest.
In short: The “humanitarian conduit” portrayal and any associated trust/miscalculation peaked with the 2018 policy approval and continued through the early 2020s. Netanyahu’s side has always stressed the humanitarian intent and necessity. Critics argue it was cynical realpolitik that downplayed Hamas’s true nature.
Note: The core facts of the Qatari funding policy (Israeli approval and coordination from 2018–2023) remain undisputed in mainstream reporting. The debate is almost entirely over intent, foresight, and consequences.
This is a clean, readable HTML conversion of the previous response.
Describe in detail the role anons believed the UK/Crown played. Did they beleive it was central? NATO/WEF/UNs all arms of the UK/Crown? DId they think the NATO/WEF/UN red cross and others all used migrants - illegal aliens to flood the US? Was that the work of the UK/Crown?Grok's Overview of Q website opinion
In Q communities on 8ch/8kun (/qresearch/ and UK-specific threads), patriots.win, Free Republic, and similar forums, anons viewed the UK/Crown as one of the three foundational pillars of the global cabal/deep state.
This belief was rooted in the longstanding “three sovereign cities” theory: City of London (financial control), Vatican (spiritual/ritual control), and Washington D.C. (political/military enforcement).
The term “Crown” rarely referred only to the British monarchy or House of Windsor. It specifically pointed to the City of London Corporation — a semi-sovereign financial enclave seen as the cabal’s banking, intelligence, and old-empire headquarters, deeply intertwined with Rothschild influence and MI6.
Was the UK/Crown Viewed as Central?
Yes — absolutely central.
- Anons placed the City of London / Crown as a co-equal power center alongside the Vatican and D.C. deep state.
- It was considered the financial brain of the cabal, controlling global banking networks, funding operations, and maintaining historical empire mechanisms for worldwide influence.
- UK intelligence (MI5/MI6/GCHQ) was seen as key enforcers, especially through the Five Eyes alliance used to spy on patriots and orchestrate operations like the Steele dossier against Trump.
- Royals and the visible UK establishment were often portrayed as compromised participants or puppets, with frequent ties drawn to Epstein networks, paedophile rings, and occult symbolism.
Early Q-related compendiums listed the “Royal UK Family – House of Windsor” alongside Rothschilds, Rockefellers, Al Saud, Soros, and the Committee of 300 as core cabal players.Were NATO, WEF, UN, Red Cross, etc. All Arms of the UK/Crown?
Not exclusively or directly as subsidiaries of the UK/Crown alone, but yes — viewed as tools and instruments of the overarching cabal in which the City of London played a major steering and financing role.
- NATO: Seen as the cabal’s military enforcement arm for endless wars and globalist policy, closely tied to UK/U.S. intelligence networks.
- WEF & UN: Primary vehicles for one-world government, Agenda 2030, the “Great Reset,” mass migration, and cultural destabilization. Funded and influenced by the same elite financial networks (including City of London).
- Red Cross and similar NGOs: Regarded as major cabal fronts for human trafficking, money laundering, and disaster profiteering (e.g., Haiti earthquake research).
The City of London was believed to provide the financial backbone, while the cabal’s power was distributed across the three cities. These organizations were tools of the collective cabal, not purely “Crown-owned.”
Did Anons Believe NATO/WEF/UN/Red Cross Used Migrants to Flood the US — and Was This the Work of the UK/Crown?
Yes — mass illegal migration was unanimously viewed as a deliberate cabal weapon.
- Anons believed “open borders,” migrant caravans, and demographic flooding of the United States (and Europe) were intentional strategies to:
- Destroy national sovereignty
- Dilute cultural identity
- Import voters and cheap labor
- Create chaos and division (“divide and conquer”)
- Visible fronts included Soros-funded caravans, UN Global Compact on Migration, and Obama/Biden-era policies.
- Upstream, these were tied to the full cabal power structure.
UK/Crown Connection to Migration Ops
- The City of London / Crown was seen as complicit through finance and intelligence networks that bankrolled globalist organizations (UN, WEF, NGOs) pushing open-border policies.
- UK itself experienced parallel “migrant crises,” which anons discussed in dedicated Q Research UK threads as evidence of the same deep-state playbook.
- Red Cross and UN-affiliated NGOs were accused of actively facilitating trafficking routes under cabal protection.
- Some anons linked it to historical British “divide-and-rule” tactics, now globalized as part of a modern empire strategy.
It was not viewed as solely the UK/Crown’s operation, but as a cabal-wide effort in which the Crown/City of London played a central financing and enabling role.
Summary of Anon Consensus
The UK/Crown (specifically the City of London) was considered a foundational and central pillar of the global cabal — not a junior partner. NATO, WEF, UN, Red Cross and similar organizations were seen as cabal tools, heavily influenced and financed by the three-city power structure. Mass migration into the US and West was regarded as deliberate demographic warfare orchestrated by this network, with the UK/Crown deeply complicit through financial control and intelligence operations.
These views were consistent across 8kun qresearch threads (including UK boards), patriots.win, Free Republic, and other Q-adjacent spaces. They formed part of the broader “Storm” narrative in which exposing and dismantling these structures was expected.
Based on discussions from 8ch/8kun qresearch, patriots.win, Free Republic, and related Q forums.
Quiet Removals in US History: How America Has Handled Compromised Officials and Spies Without Causing Panic
Question:"Is there precedent in US history for quietly removing or sidelining compromised individuals in government—often through classified or administrative means—specifically to avoid the public unrest or national security risks that a high-profile removal might cause?"Grok:Yes, there is precedent in US history for discreet or "classified" handling of the removal or neutralization of compromised officials/spies to avoid public unrest, panic, or damage to national security. This aligns with your interest in "surgical" approaches—targeted, low-profile actions rather than broad public purges. It is not exactly "deeming removal classified" as a formal policy, but agencies have used classification, quiet retirements, internal transfers, or sealed proceedings to minimize disruption.Key Historical ExamplesThese approaches prioritize protecting ongoing operations, sources, and stability over dramatic public accountability. Broad "decontamination" (e.g., McCarthy-era excesses) often caused collateral damage, backlash, and institutional harm.Relevance to "Surgical" RemovalIn your extreme infiltration scenario, this precedent supports targeted, evidence-driven actions:
- Venona Project and Cold War Soviet Spies (1940s-1950s): US counterintelligence (FBI, Army Signals Intelligence) identified dozens of Soviet agents in government via decrypted cables. Many cases were handled discreetly:
- Some identified spies were quietly removed from sensitive positions, monitored, or allowed to resign without public trials to protect the Venona source (which remained classified for decades).
- Full public prosecutions (e.g., Rosenbergs) occurred when evidence could stand independently, but many lesser agents faced administrative actions or surveillance rather than high-profile arrests. The goal was avoiding panic about widespread infiltration while not alerting the Soviets that their codes were broken.
en.wikipedia.org- Espionage and Loyalty Programs (WWII/Cold War): Under the Espionage Act and Truman's loyalty program, some officials faced quiet removal or reassignment. Classification protected sources/methods, and public disclosure was limited to prevent morale collapse or enemy advantage.
- Modern Counterintelligence: Compromised officials (e.g., those passing classified info or with foreign ties) are often handled via:
- Security clearance revocation and quiet firing/resignation.
- Administrative proceedings rather than criminal trials when evidence is sensitive.
- Plea deals or sealed aspects of cases to limit public fallout.
The Constitution and laws favor this measured approach—due process, rule of law, and minimal disruption—over revolutionary purges. History shows that overt, large-scale removals risk exactly the collapse you mentioned, while discreet surgical steps have helped preserve institutions during real infiltration threats. The tension is always balancing transparency/accountability with security/stability.
- Quietly sideline the most dangerous compromised figures (via 25th Amendment, firings, or incapacity findings) while maintaining government continuity.
- Use classification for sensitive intelligence on foreign control to avoid immediate public panic or market/economic chaos.
- Prosecute publicly only where it strengthens legitimacy (clear cases with strong evidence).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
