Posted on 03/05/2018 12:05:20 AM PST by ransomnote
This thread is a friendly collaborative place for FReepers to analyze information and share opinons. FReepers have a wide variety of reasons for investigating Q Anon content; this is not the appropriate place to criticize or badger those who choose to use some of their time in this manner.
This thread is a continuation of the prior Q Anon thread located here:
http://freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3636549/posts
I plan to post one thread at a time and ping new drops posted to it. The current schedule is to post new threads Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. When I post each (new) thread, the prior thread is retired and all new posts occur on the newest thread.
If you are new to Q Anon, the three links below provide overviews to help answer the questions, "Who is Q?" and "Why read Q drops?".
Q Anon: A Freeper's post re the "new Parallel Construct that Trump has created"
First post to “Q” ping list. Please read and let me know if you want off or on it
Q "drops" (i.e., posts) can be read with their original formatting at the following link:
You can locate my Q Anon threads by searching the key words "Q Anon" or "Qanon" using the search window in the upper right of the Free Republic's forum page. The active Q Anon thread will be shown at the top (newest) of the search results.
I stored links to many prior Q Anon threads in my profile page located here: http://freerepublic.com/~ransomnote/
Q drops (i.e., posts) often use acronyms. A few FReepers have begun to organize acronym into helpful reference materials. Here is Swordmaker's list of acronyms for your reference: A FReeper list of acronyms used in Q Anon "drops."
SkyPilot has been collecting Q Anon information into one interesting, detailed, "story of Q" post which I'll place here:
https://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3633313/posts?page=163#163
President John F. Kennedy's excellent speech regarding secret societies, as well as comments about the press, is located at the following link. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdMbmdFOvTs
A helpful FReeper passed along the following link. It’s to a group that goes live on Youtube when Q drops are released. I’ll put the link to their general Youtube “channel” here. When new Q drops are released, they start a new live stream video which remains active as long as they have new insights or information or guests to share information. You can look for any live stream videos in progress or recordings of their prior videos at the link.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCWW3gYCvKS412p7o6qSK5gg
Submarines are also bringing drugs and a few people into US. They caught one off the coast of San Diego a couple of years ago. A friend of mine was fishing off the Florida Keyes recently when they came upon a small sub surfacing. The boat captain immediately took off saying it was ______ Cartel. I’m wondering if it’s c eye A and we paid for that sub. She said it was about the size of a semi
Storm clouds? Could be. A little smooth or soft for me, but you may be correct. Need someone who actually knows.
BTW . . .
Post 69 dated Nov 3 . . .
"probably" corresponds to President Trump visit to Asia. "President embarked on a 12 day trip to five different Asian countries on . . . November 3. Am thinking thats what thats all about.
Post 765 dated Feb 15 . . .
South Korea Olympics
Pretty sure the reference to water has to do with those two photographs. Gotta find someone who can translate the meaning.
extra . . . Looking at those dates in the news, reading the news article was disgusting. All blaming Trump how he was going to make things worse. Wish I could shove those articles up the author's . . .
All steel have close to the same modulus of elasticity (Young's modulus), regardless of its tensile strength. The round number for that, for steel, is 30 million (PSI). Not that it would hold, but that value means that if a one inch long by one square inch section was subjected to a 30 million pound load, it would deflect one inch. A one square inch section of A36 would stretch the same as a hardened tool steel of 200,000 psi UTS, if both were subjected to a 36,000 pound load -- about 0.0012 inch (30 million divided by 36 thousand), per inch of bar length. Your 10 inch long test specimen would be 10.012 inch long.
On this point, I am speculating and working from memory - When "yield" and elongation are stated as correlated, the correlation is the amount of stress that results in 2% permanent strain/elongation. Not all steel parts have elongation/ductility, some fail without much deformation in advance of reaching UTS.
Steel has approximately the same mechanical properties in compression as it does in tension, contrasted with concretes which are great in compression and weak in tension. The limiting factor for compression loading is often column/buckling, not yield.
Later, thanks
I was referring to a narrow accusation, the failure to investigate the hacking of Clinton's server.
DiGenova said that when Clapper found out the server may have been compromised, he was required by law to do a "damage assessment" to ascertain whether hacking occurred.Strzok, Clapper Ignored Possible Hack of Hillary's Server 'With Consent of Obama'The former prosecutor said Clapper did no such thing, and that such action may have provided cover for Strzok - who was working on the related FBI investigation - to decline to investigate further as well.
There is nothing in this long post that I did not already know. Nor am I trying to disagree with any of it. Perhaps it’ll be informative for the others on the thread, even if it’s not a subject most people are dying to read about.
I did take quite a bit of economics in college, had a double major in math and chemistry. Went back for additional degree In Finance, Accounting, and economics.
I Worked as Bank Auditor, internal accounting, Certified Treasury Officer, and Certified Financial planner. I have also read Milton Friedman’s Writings, but never had a chance to discuss them with him.
I am not a total illiterate on the subject.
As I said, I think it’s more or less semantics used by people other than economists.
For Example, below you’ll see an excerpt from this day in history:
“On June 5, 1933, the United States went off the gold standard, a monetary system in which currency is backed by gold, when Congress enacted a joint resolution nullifying the right of creditors to demand payment in gold.”
And here’s an excerpt from Bloomberg:
“To bring the economy out of the Great Depression, President Franklin D. Roosevelt took the U.S. off the gold standard in 1933.”
Then there’s this from the Richmond Fed:
When did the United States go off the gold standard?
“H.J. Res. 192, approved by President Roosevelt on June 5, 1933, provided that obligations payable in gold or specific coin or currency are contrary to public policy, and that those obligations could be discharged dollar for dollar in legal tender.
Because the dollar was no longer freely convertible, one could consider that the United States was no longer on the gold standard at that time.
If, however, one considers the gold standard as a monetary system in which the unit of money is backed by gold even if the monetary unit cannot be converted into gold, one could argue that the United States went off of the gold standard on August 15, 1971 when President Nixon announced that the U.S. dollar would no longer be convertible into gold in the international markets.”
And of course almost nobody specifies whether they are talking about gold species standard, gold bullion standard, or gold exchange standard - No they just say the gold standard.
So like I said, it’s semantics to a great extent. So if someone says Roosevelt took us off the gold standard, that’s fine with me, and I don’t feel the need to list all the crap he did and didn’t do or tell them they are wrong.
Same with Nixon, as I’ve read elsewhere, that technically he didn’t take us off the gold standard, that was a process that started in 1910 and really most of it happened under FDR, until Nixon defacto ended it.
Well, one could argue with that point of view, and certainly I’ve seen arguments pro and con - but I wouldn’t.
For me it’s fine if someone says Nixon took us off the gold standard, or if they say he ended the Breton Woods agreement. Makes me no never mind.
I do think it’s important for people to know that both Nixon and FDR had issues with the gold standard, and a little bit about what those problems were.
However, 1-3 sentences on each is more than enough for most people I run into. Obviously YMMV
I know my remarks appear to defend Kobe, but they aren't meant so much for that, as to make the point that the details make the difference, and some generic "fudged quality records" is vague - all we can do from the vague statement is speculate about the ramifications.
And I completely agree that the nuclear industry is or would be thrown into turmoil; and that safety-critical uses on airframe would have similar ramifications.
Great story about the forced choice of contractor for the Shuttle SRB. Pentagon is rife with similar stories. Much corruption.
I agree the case becomes weaker, maybe impossible based on missing evidence. But missing evidence doe not per se mean the fact the evidence is missing can't come in to the trial. The people who saw it (the evidence, before it went missing) can testify they saw it. That is not hearsay.
If the recording is the only evidence (well, recording plus the fact that some sworn officers saw it), and the recording is missing, a prosecutor would not bring a case. Not because there is literally no evidence, but because even though the recording was viewed, there is ample room for reasonable doubt the allegation is true.
When it rains, what happens to the water?
It rises due to the inflow of run-off.
And, normally, I'm fiercely for State Law.
It just seems to me that the Colo anti-rain collecting law is UnConstitutional. At least it is government overreach.
at FR.
1. The better informed at least tentatively accept the probable reality of a significant amount of evidence.
2. Then, the far less informed but 100% certain-that-they-know-it-all descend on the topic with fingers pointing & wagging and the haughty, caustic, hostile wording flying.
3. It's just usually not worth the bleeding fingers to deal with such prissy arrogance demanding better-than-court-room & laboratory proof for every tiny puzzle piece.
4. Qx put up with that mentality all his years on FR about UFOs and globalism. And the hyper rationalists were thoroughly wrong. Most probably won't admit it even now with proof more abundant than ever. It's just that a lot of the 'wait-and-see' folks have finally realized where the fact lay.
The weather modification stuff has been very clear in the Federal budget for a long time. Many have preferred to think it's slightly successful rain making efforts here and there--when the evidence suggests far more complex and far more sinister efforts and results. When the globalists & their Generals put that much funding and effort into it--it's not just to aid a few farmers and their crops.
Mar 06 2018 13:06:24
Q
!UW.yye1fxo
568863
https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/629
So much is open source.
So much left to be connected.
Why are the children in Haiti in high demand?
How are they smuggled out?
‘Adoption’ process.
Local ‘staging’ ports friendly to CF?
Track donations.
Cross against location relative to Haiti.
Think logically.
The choice, to KNOW, will be yours.
Q
*****************************************************
OK so I couldn’t sleep, here’s some info from George Webb regarding Haiti etc.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBq1VGyizdc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uFymAeyaiiM
Either they fail to realize it is a globalist depopulation related goal to re-wild all but a few large cities--or they suicidally think it's a wonderful thing for 'Mother Earth' as they worship the creation instead of the Creator.
Have a bias toward a geographic one but yours is an interesting alternative.
THAT idiocy angered more than a lot of us in the West.
her level of evilness blows me away. SHE is the kidnapper they were warning about!
Besides the Q-Anon stuff about that 11 March eventuality. And I'm not crystal clear on which is Q-Anon about it and which isn't.
Just haven't followed it all that carefully, I guess. Sigh.
Thanks.
Is that it? Watch the water LEVELS? Remember zero saying he was gonna lower the seas? What was the plan? Evaporate three feet into the atmosphere?
What about testimony say from 6-8 NYPD Commissioner etc. personnel that the copies they still retain are authentically and exactly what the original contained?
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.