Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Q Anon: Some of the layers of organization within the New World Order
qcodefag.github.io/? ^ | 1/25/2018 | Q Anon

Posted on 01/25/2018 9:31:08 AM PST by ransomnote

If you are new to Q Anon drops (i.e. posts), please read the following link for a general overview:

First post to "Q" ping list. Please read and let me know if you want off or on it

In the following post, I refer to specific Q drops by placing the sequence number in parenthesis following an excerpt. For your reference, all official Q drops can be found at the following link and are numbered from oldest (bottom of page) to newest (top of page).

Q drop library>

If you are not familiar with the New World Order which underlies and unites America's enemies world wide, the following post may help you conceptualize this organization. I use the name "Evil Inc." in this post to refer to the family legacy underpinning the New World Order.

Q Drops #541-#547 & #549 dated 1/18/2018:photo gallery of (in)famous people

Many Q drops taken together indicate that the underlying "management structure" of the New World Order can be conceptualized as a pyramid. The pyramid is comprised of the House of Saud (4 Trillion), Rothschild (2 Trillion) and Soros (1 Trillion) (#133).

Q announced on 11/11/2017 on that the first side of the NWO pyramid (House of Saud) had been dismantled for the first time in history (#134).
The House of Saud's role in the NWO is described by Q as follows:

Q drop #299 (excerpted)
Dec 7 2017 19:05:16
SA
Oil Tech Sex/Children
SA Controls (assigned) US / UK Politicians / Tech Co's (primary)

George Soros' role in the NWO is described by Q as follows:

Q drop #299
Dec 7 2017 19:05:16
Soros
Controls organizations of people (create division /
brainwash) + management / operator of slush funds
(personal net worth never reduces think DOJ
settlements Consumer Iran Enviro pacts etc etc)

Note also that Q said on Dec 7, 2017 George Soros takes orders from P (#416) and that two sides to the pyramid remained on that date (i.e., Soros, Rothschild). Q drop #14 indicates Soros "...funded operations get violent and engage in domestic terrorism..." I believe Q drop #339 indicates that the Soros side of the pyramid had been removed ("We have a special place picked out for GS. Really special")

Rothschild's role in the NWO is described by Q as follows:

Dec 7 2017 19:05:16
Rothschilds (cult leaders)(church)(P)
Banks / Financial Institutions
WW Gov Control
Gov Controls People

Q drop #179 refers to an extraction or attempt at intervention which occurred on the Rothschild estate on November 21, 2017. Mystery surrounds the identity of the one fatality in the aircraft collision above the Rothschild estate who has never been identified. The collision occurred after Q taunted Lyn de Rothshild in Q drop #150 (November 13, 2017). I'm behind in my Q research but when I was reading up on it, Evelyn Rothschild was said to be the head of the NWO satanic church and had not been seen after the collision).

It seems rather convoluted, and I'm not yet sure how to tease apart the familial basis of the New World Order from the pyramid concept and the players involved. Note that Q drop #15 has this to say about it, "Realize Soros, Clintons, Obama, Putin, etc. are all controlled by 3 families (the 4th was removed post Trump's victory)."


TOPICS: Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS: nwo; q; qanon; russianpropagandists; russianpuppets; russianstooges; russiasucks
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-135 next last
To: Fantasywriter

Anyone who thinks these individuals are above the law is not thinking clearly.

Any attempt to protect these individuals from the legal consequences of their crimes will fail.


101 posted on 01/26/2018 11:26:08 AM PST by reasonisfaith ("...because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved." (2 Thessalonians))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: reasonisfaith

“Jose Padilla didn’t conspire to assassinate a US president.”

Not really relevant, since only the “enemy combatant” part of your question might have any impact on how someone would be treated judicially.


102 posted on 01/26/2018 11:27:16 AM PST by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: reasonisfaith

Is there any evidence that such individuals have suffered any consequences for their actions?


103 posted on 01/26/2018 11:28:15 AM PST by Fantasywriter (Any attempt to do forensic work using Internet artifacts is fraught with pitfalls. JoeProbono)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman

If you conspire with a foreign agent to bring harm to the US president, you are engaging in an act of war and you are an enemy combatant.


104 posted on 01/26/2018 1:14:12 PM PST by reasonisfaith ("...because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved." (2 Thessalonians))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: Fantasywriter

Losing the 2016 presidential election was a major slapdown.


105 posted on 01/26/2018 1:15:17 PM PST by reasonisfaith ("...because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved." (2 Thessalonians))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: reasonisfaith

Trump winning the electionwas a miracle of God. The more we learn of the degree to which the intelligence agencies plotted against him, the greater the miracle appears.


106 posted on 01/26/2018 2:29:02 PM PST by Fantasywriter (Any attempt to do forensic work using Internet artifacts is fraught with pitfalls. JoeProbono)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: reasonisfaith

“If you conspire with a foreign agent to bring harm to the US president, you are engaging in an act of war and you are an enemy combatant.”

Perhaps, but if the best legal team that George W. Bush put together couldn’t make that stick, I doubt that you will succeed where they failed.


107 posted on 01/29/2018 8:03:31 AM PST by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman

Have you not seen things are different now?


108 posted on 01/29/2018 9:35:48 AM PST by reasonisfaith ("...because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved." (2 Thessalonians))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: reasonisfaith

What, you think we suddenly have a different Constitution and stuff like habeas corpus or right to trial by jury doesn’t exist anymore?


109 posted on 01/29/2018 9:47:01 AM PST by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman

You mean when the they plot with foreign agents to bring harm to a sitting president?


110 posted on 01/29/2018 12:20:37 PM PST by reasonisfaith ("...because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved." (2 Thessalonians))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman

You mean the part of the Constitution where it says the President can take executive action against enemies of the United States?


111 posted on 01/29/2018 12:28:52 PM PST by reasonisfaith ("...because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved." (2 Thessalonians))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: reasonisfaith

“You mean the part of the Constitution where it says the President can take executive action against enemies of the United States?”

Which part is that exactly?


112 posted on 01/29/2018 1:30:45 PM PST by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman

Have you never seen the Constitution?


113 posted on 01/29/2018 1:47:29 PM PST by reasonisfaith ("...because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved." (2 Thessalonians))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: reasonisfaith

Of course I have. Why are you avoiding answering the question?

You cited a certain “part of Constitution”. I would like you to specify which part of the Constitution you are referring to. It should be simple, since the Constitution is divided into Articles and Sections for easy reference.


114 posted on 01/29/2018 2:52:00 PM PST by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman

Are you sure you want me to be the one to tell you?

It’ll make you look like you didn’t know. I’m giving you a chance here.


115 posted on 01/29/2018 4:52:17 PM PST by reasonisfaith ("...because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved." (2 Thessalonians))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: reasonisfaith

Still stalling? How hard can it be to cite the section you are referring to?

You cited something, and it’s only proper to provide the exact citation when requested. Either provide it, or admit you can’t.


116 posted on 01/30/2018 7:46:00 AM PST by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman

I didn’t say I was stalling, I said I was giving you a chance.


117 posted on 01/30/2018 9:31:41 AM PST by reasonisfaith ("...because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved." (2 Thessalonians))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman

Read the first line of Article two Section two.


118 posted on 01/30/2018 9:32:48 AM PST by reasonisfaith ("...because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved." (2 Thessalonians))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: reasonisfaith

“The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.”

Hmm, help me out here, where exactly in that line does it say: “the President can take executive action against enemies of the United States”, as you claimed?


119 posted on 01/30/2018 9:45:01 AM PST by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]

To: Mears

bfl


120 posted on 01/30/2018 9:51:04 AM PST by Mears
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-135 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson