He’s my pickCould this be the VP pick?
Trump did say he would announce this week, today is Monday and here we have a 4yr Delta
that makes reference to a certain 3 star Lt General.....
He’s the only person Obama told Trump not to put in his administration
He knows where the bodies are buried!
Transcribed ‘Digital Soldier’ Segment Of Lt. Gen. Flynn’s Speech To ‘Young America’s Foundation’ Students And Supporters In Washington, D.C., November 12, 2016.
“We Have An Army Of Digital Soldiers.” — U.S. Army Lt. Gen. Michael T. Flynn
Transcribed ‘Digital Soldier’ Segment Of Lt. Gen. Flynn’s Speech To ‘Young America’s Foundation’ Students And Supporters In Washington…
We Have An Army Of Digital Soldiers. What We Are Now, What We Call, I Call Them, Cause This Was An Insurgency Folks, This Was Run Like An Insurgency. This Was Irregular Warfare At Its Finest, In Politics.”
350 days later the first qdrop appeared and as a bonus
Qdrop 350 talks about this EXACT concept of digital soldiers.....if it werent for Q, Q+ and the ANONS I guarantfktee you that the public would only know a fraction of what they do right now, which in itself is only a tiny fraction of the disclosures to come.
I will rarely post research THIS DEEP on the RX because I realize that 99percent of people here are basically NEVER going to care about LEGIT detailed research on topics and will just defer to their favorite MSM talking heads to tell them what to think.
However with Assange and Pompeo being uber relevant these days I saw this incredible effort by an ANON to make sense of it all and figure there are AT LEAST 5 people here that would find this interesting.
This is what he came up with:
Earlier this year, Tucker Carlson came out and stated that "Mike Pompeo tried to have Julian Assange Killed. It's a known fact".
It appears that since then, some people have simply swallowed the narrative whole, gobbling it down without any critical thinking or without any independent research.
Independent research. It's what anons should be specializing in, right? IMO, one is NOT anon simply if one follows or is familiar with Q, or simply if one believes in the Q operation and "the Plan". To be truly anon means to adopt the methods Q exhorted anons to:
Amplification By the Mainstream Media
Anyway, when I heard the statement by Tucker, I felt more than sceptical. After all, Q reinforced their endorsement of Mike Pompeo multiple times. E.g.
u/#q950
See also: Q1122 (Trust Kansas), Q2979,
More importantly, Mike Pompeo worked with DJT to accomplish a lot of work. He was put in place by Trump, worked with Trump. Is it reasonable to think that on one hand, Trump is a 5D chess genius BUT also he put Deep State people in his most important cabinet positions?
Anyway, after listening to Just Human on Defected (https://rumble.com/playlists/Hdp1AQdJ7JI), I decided to dig on the story itself. Here is what I found:
The narrative that Pompeo at the CIA was "investigating ways" (not even actually trying, but just "looking at possibilities") starts from some extremely dodgy, deep state and Anti-Trump authors. It was taken up and promulgated by the Deep State propaganda apparatus, including The Guardian, Reuters, The Independent, etc., and since then, it has been kept alive and given new energy this year in particular.
Here is what the Guardian said:
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2...-trump-discussed-assassinating-julian-assange
So, just here, let's pause. Knowing Q, do you really think that the Trump Administration was "furious about WikiLeaks’ publication of “Vault 7”? Anons know that according to Q, Assange has been under White Hat protection while the Wikileaks organization itself was taken over by deep state Clowns In Action. Q1849, Q1595
Who would have the most interest in smearing Trump, Pompeo and the Trump Administration? Everyone knows that Assange has been the darling of the left, because he represented such an attack on the Establishment. But it was also Assange who declare that he (they, wikileaks) didn't publish any dirt on Trump because "there isn't any".
Given what we know about Seth Rich, Assange, Trump and Q, is there ANY reason to really suspect that DJT or anyone part of his team would want to get rid of Assange?
So, then, what does this story represent? Nothing more than a deployment intended to paint Trump with the smear of 'dirty CIA' (which the Left will use when convenient,. Remember, divide and conquer. The Left have their useful evil enemies (i.e. CIA) and the Right have their useful evil enemies (i.e. Marxists).
But how to smear Trump? By painting Mike Pompeo as an evil CIA director working at Trump's behest, or driven by the obvious corrupt CIA elements. Typically, the 'report' cites officials, former officials, etc, ALL ANONYMOUS...
Think about that.
The Origins of the Narrative
So where, then, did the 'report' actually originate? Yahoo News:
https://www.newsweek.com/fact-check-did-cia-want-julian-assange-killed-1917171
"former unnamed U.S. officials" speaking to leftist propaganda anti-Trump 'journalists'? Really?
Where did the narrative start?
(ibid)
Here's where it started
Yahoo News: "Kidnapping, assassination and a London shoot-out: Inside the CIA's secret war plans against WikiLeaks" by Zach Dorfman, Sean D. Naylor and Michael Isikoff
https://www.yahoo.com/news/kidnappi...t-war-plans-against-wiki-leaks-090057786.html
So who are these authors?
Zach Dorfman
https://www.carnegiecouncil.org/people/zach-dorfman
Sean D Naylor
https://www.yahoo.com/author/sean-naylor/
Michael Isikoff
https://www.yahoo.com/author/michael-isikoff/
https://www.hachette.com.au/michael...r-on-america-and-the-election-of-donald-trump
This is where it started.
So the question is, is this a legitimate reveal of plans and efforts by evil Mike Pompeo and/or evil Donald Trump to murder Julian Assange? Or is it a smear operation intended to divide and conquer?
Is it an important red-pill truth being revealed by establishment mainstream journalists, or a deployment by anti-Trumpers to add more propaganda showing Orange Man Bad, or for Trump Supporters, to sow seeds of doubt and distrust of Mike Pompeo, who was Trump's right hand man in so many critical international initiatives during 2018 - 2020?
Also, did Trump aka Q+ assign evil Mike Pompeo to the CIA as one of the very first aspects of his Administration (January 2017) as soon as he got in to the White House because ... well, Trump knew the CIA was corrupt and knew that they were deeply involved in the Russia Hoax amongst other things, so, "yeah, what the heck, I should assign an evil Deep State player like Mike Pompeo to the CIA for the first year"?
Or does it make more sense that Trump put Pompeo there to make changes and clean up certain key core sectors in the CIA to disable them and advance the Agenda of the Plan, and that the reports of 'discussions' from anonymous sources are bogus and fabricated?
I think anyone with a solid understanding of Q and Q+, and what has been going on the past 7 years, the answer is pretty obvious. But maybe that's just me.
Tucker Carlson
I like Tucker and I think he is playing a really interesting role in reaching out to a LOT of the middle-stream America and world, with information that they have been unaware of. In other words, Tucker is helping in the work of making the Great Awakening go mainstream.
But his blanket anti-Pompeo statements, promoting what seems obvious to me to be a deep state narrative planted by deep state operatives and promulgated by deep state propaganda organs, make no sense. So I remind myself that no one is perfect, and no one knows everything, and that everyone has their own biases and prejudices.
Personally, I find
the story that Pompeo (Kansas) is trusted deeply by Trump and the White Hats, that he was given a mission to execute at the CIA (which I assume he accomplished, as part of the overall plan), that after that mission he worked very closely with DJT at DJT's state Department to accomplish key diplomatic and other objectives, that after 2021 any strange stuff between Trump and Pompeo are partly kayfabe, that the White Hats have been protecting Assange UNTIL now and that Assange is now being set free as part of an overall plan (timing)
much more credible than
the narrative that Trump was dumb in trusting Pompeo, or that he for some reason put an evil actor in charge of the CIA as one of the first acts of his administration (for some unexplained and unfathomable reason, or to 'expose' evil Pompeo for a whole year and three months ), that Q lied or gave us disinfo when saying "Trust kansas", that somehow Trump managed to accomplish his international objectives even while using a deep state evil Secretary of State (again, for some weird reason, because not only are patriots NOT in control, but even DJT is NOT in control, and in fact has to do whatever the Cabal tells him to? /sarc), and that the CIA wanted to murder Assange but for some reason decided not to, and that three MSM propaganda merchants, including one who wrote a big book about the "harrowing story" of how Putin, Russia interfered with the 2016 election in order to get Trump elected", are disclosing the real truth about either Trump OR Mike Pompeo.
But maybe there is more information here? Did you find OTHER facts that make the second scenario more credible? if you did, put them in the comment section. After all, its really about independent research, thinking for yourself, and not just accepting something because Tucker or Joe Rogan or anyone else said so. Right?
However with Assange and Pompeo being uber relevant these days I saw this incredible effort by an ANON to make sense of it all and figure there are AT LEAST 5 people here that would find this interesting.
This is what he came up with:
TLDR: The Narrative that Mike Pompeo is Evil because he tried to or wanted to assassinate Julian Assange started from extremely dubious origins. Researching the origins of the narrative raises some important questions.
Earlier this year, Tucker Carlson came out and stated that "Mike Pompeo tried to have Julian Assange Killed. It's a known fact".
It appears that since then, some people have simply swallowed the narrative whole, gobbling it down without any critical thinking or without any independent research.
Independent research. It's what anons should be specializing in, right? IMO, one is NOT anon simply if one follows or is familiar with Q, or simply if one believes in the Q operation and "the Plan". To be truly anon means to adopt the methods Q exhorted anons to:
Amplification By the Mainstream Media
Anyway, when I heard the statement by Tucker, I felt more than sceptical. After all, Q reinforced their endorsement of Mike Pompeo multiple times. E.g.
u/#q950
See also: Q1122 (Trust Kansas), Q2979,
More importantly, Mike Pompeo worked with DJT to accomplish a lot of work. He was put in place by Trump, worked with Trump. Is it reasonable to think that on one hand, Trump is a 5D chess genius BUT also he put Deep State people in his most important cabinet positions?
Anyway, after listening to Just Human on Defected (https://rumble.com/playlists/Hdp1AQdJ7JI), I decided to dig on the story itself. Here is what I found:
The narrative that Pompeo at the CIA was "investigating ways" (not even actually trying, but just "looking at possibilities") starts from some extremely dodgy, deep state and Anti-Trump authors. It was taken up and promulgated by the Deep State propaganda apparatus, including The Guardian, Reuters, The Independent, etc., and since then, it has been kept alive and given new energy this year in particular.
Here is what the Guardian said:
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2...-trump-discussed-assassinating-julian-assange
So, just here, let's pause. Knowing Q, do you really think that the Trump Administration was "furious about WikiLeaks’ publication of “Vault 7”? Anons know that according to Q, Assange has been under White Hat protection while the Wikileaks organization itself was taken over by deep state Clowns In Action. Q1849, Q1595
Who would have the most interest in smearing Trump, Pompeo and the Trump Administration? Everyone knows that Assange has been the darling of the left, because he represented such an attack on the Establishment. But it was also Assange who declare that he (they, wikileaks) didn't publish any dirt on Trump because "there isn't any".
Given what we know about Seth Rich, Assange, Trump and Q, is there ANY reason to really suspect that DJT or anyone part of his team would want to get rid of Assange?
So, then, what does this story represent? Nothing more than a deployment intended to paint Trump with the smear of 'dirty CIA' (which the Left will use when convenient,. Remember, divide and conquer. The Left have their useful evil enemies (i.e. CIA) and the Right have their useful evil enemies (i.e. Marxists).
But how to smear Trump? By painting Mike Pompeo as an evil CIA director working at Trump's behest, or driven by the obvious corrupt CIA elements. Typically, the 'report' cites officials, former officials, etc, ALL ANONYMOUS...
Think about that.
The Origins of the Narrative
So where, then, did the 'report' actually originate? Yahoo News:
https://www.newsweek.com/fact-check-did-cia-want-julian-assange-killed-1917171
"former unnamed U.S. officials" speaking to leftist propaganda anti-Trump 'journalists'? Really?
Where did the narrative start?
(ibid)
Here's where it started
Yahoo News: "Kidnapping, assassination and a London shoot-out: Inside the CIA's secret war plans against WikiLeaks" by Zach Dorfman, Sean D. Naylor and Michael Isikoff
https://www.yahoo.com/news/kidnappi...t-war-plans-against-wiki-leaks-090057786.html
So who are these authors?
Zach Dorfman
https://www.carnegiecouncil.org/people/zach-dorfman
Sean D Naylor
https://www.yahoo.com/author/sean-naylor/
Michael Isikoff
https://www.yahoo.com/author/michael-isikoff/
https://www.hachette.com.au/michael...r-on-america-and-the-election-of-donald-trump
This is where it started.
So the question is, is this a legitimate reveal of plans and efforts by evil Mike Pompeo and/or evil Donald Trump to murder Julian Assange? Or is it a smear operation intended to divide and conquer?
Is it an important red-pill truth being revealed by establishment mainstream journalists, or a deployment by anti-Trumpers to add more propaganda showing Orange Man Bad, or for Trump Supporters, to sow seeds of doubt and distrust of Mike Pompeo, who was Trump's right hand man in so many critical international initiatives during 2018 - 2020?
Also, did Trump aka Q+ assign evil Mike Pompeo to the CIA as one of the very first aspects of his Administration (January 2017) as soon as he got in to the White House because ... well, Trump knew the CIA was corrupt and knew that they were deeply involved in the Russia Hoax amongst other things, so, "yeah, what the heck, I should assign an evil Deep State player like Mike Pompeo to the CIA for the first year"?
Or does it make more sense that Trump put Pompeo there to make changes and clean up certain key core sectors in the CIA to disable them and advance the Agenda of the Plan, and that the reports of 'discussions' from anonymous sources are bogus and fabricated?
I think anyone with a solid understanding of Q and Q+, and what has been going on the past 7 years, the answer is pretty obvious. But maybe that's just me.
Tucker Carlson
I like Tucker and I think he is playing a really interesting role in reaching out to a LOT of the middle-stream America and world, with information that they have been unaware of. In other words, Tucker is helping in the work of making the Great Awakening go mainstream.
But his blanket anti-Pompeo statements, promoting what seems obvious to me to be a deep state narrative planted by deep state operatives and promulgated by deep state propaganda organs, make no sense. So I remind myself that no one is perfect, and no one knows everything, and that everyone has their own biases and prejudices.
Personally, I find
the story that Pompeo (Kansas) is trusted deeply by Trump and the White Hats, that he was given a mission to execute at the CIA (which I assume he accomplished, as part of the overall plan), that after that mission he worked very closely with DJT at DJT's state Department to accomplish key diplomatic and other objectives, that after 2021 any strange stuff between Trump and Pompeo are partly kayfabe, that the White Hats have been protecting Assange UNTIL now and that Assange is now being set free as part of an overall plan (timing)
much more credible than
the narrative that Trump was dumb in trusting Pompeo, or that he for some reason put an evil actor in charge of the CIA as one of the first acts of his administration (for some unexplained and unfathomable reason, or to 'expose' evil Pompeo for a whole year and three months ), that Q lied or gave us disinfo when saying "Trust kansas", that somehow Trump managed to accomplish his international objectives even while using a deep state evil Secretary of State (again, for some weird reason, because not only are patriots NOT in control, but even DJT is NOT in control, and in fact has to do whatever the Cabal tells him to? /sarc), and that the CIA wanted to murder Assange but for some reason decided not to, and that three MSM propaganda merchants, including one who wrote a big book about the "harrowing story" of how Putin, Russia interfered with the 2016 election in order to get Trump elected", are disclosing the real truth about either Trump OR Mike Pompeo.
But maybe there is more information here? Did you find OTHER facts that make the second scenario more credible? if you did, put them in the comment section. After all, its really about independent research, thinking for yourself, and not just accepting something because Tucker or Joe Rogan or anyone else said so. Right?
This is how someone describes the MOST ACTIVE Anon group that I am a member of......I think his description is very accurate
The MSM who is in the business of gaslighting, deflecton and obfuscating the truth of their masters,
will have you believe ANONS are hardly a group of nutjobs with wild unfounded "conspiracy theories", Instead they are
this:
This is one of the places to go for more sophisticated analysis and comms decodes of geopolitics.
We start from the point of view that there is a longstanding international criminal cabal which has insinuated itself into the banking, religious, military, government, health sectors of society and that they have malicious intent due to their belief system. For example, most anons here believe that most major wars are planned out (approximately) in advance and the cabal will make money no matter what the outcome. The same with monetary crashes and famines.
The cabal has been here since antiquity thousands and thousands of years and pre-dates current main religions.
We are a part of the resistance to this cabal and part of what we do is analyse geopolitics including but not limited to the Q military intelligence backchannel from a section of the US military intelligence. This section is recognisably also part of this resistance.
We also believe in a general awakening of mankind where we being to understand ourselves and our history, which has been obscured from us deliberately by the cabal.
This general waking up of the populus involves everyone seeing that wars and money system and propaganda have been used against us for millenia. This isn't limited to this particular community at all, but distributed throughout the alternative media and the truth movement, we just have our own specialisation.
Having said that, I think we have perhaps 5K active users and 10-100 times more lurkers who aren't active users or don't have an account.
You find some analysis here turns up in other places as ideas get cycled round the various anon groups with their different specialisations, in the same way, you'll see that we discuss many other people's contributions from other areas of the alternative media, for example, Badlands media.
The MSM who is in the business of gaslighting, deflecton and obfuscating the truth of their masters,
will have you believe ANONS are hardly a group of nutjobs with wild unfounded "conspiracy theories", Instead they are
this:
This is one of the places to go for more sophisticated analysis and comms decodes of geopolitics.
We start from the point of view that there is a longstanding international criminal cabal which has insinuated itself into the banking, religious, military, government, health sectors of society and that they have malicious intent due to their belief system. For example, most anons here believe that most major wars are planned out (approximately) in advance and the cabal will make money no matter what the outcome. The same with monetary crashes and famines.
The cabal has been here since antiquity thousands and thousands of years and pre-dates current main religions.
We are a part of the resistance to this cabal and part of what we do is analyse geopolitics including but not limited to the Q military intelligence backchannel from a section of the US military intelligence. This section is recognisably also part of this resistance.
We also believe in a general awakening of mankind where we being to understand ourselves and our history, which has been obscured from us deliberately by the cabal.
This general waking up of the populus involves everyone seeing that wars and money system and propaganda have been used against us for millenia. This isn't limited to this particular community at all, but distributed throughout the alternative media and the truth movement, we just have our own specialisation.
Having said that, I think we have perhaps 5K active users and 10-100 times more lurkers who aren't active users or don't have an account.
You find some analysis here turns up in other places as ideas get cycled round the various anon groups with their different specialisations, in the same way, you'll see that we discuss many other people's contributions from other areas of the alternative media, for example, Badlands media.
Before "Q" Recruited Donald J. Trump..
Globalists feared "The Military Industrial Complex"...
An Excerpt from "I Don't Like Ike"
by Mike King
JANUARY 1961: Globalist Eisenhower's Farewell TV Address Warns of the "Military Industrial Complex"
Still stinging from candidate-now-President-Elect John Kennedy’s criticism over his "missile gap," Eisenhower's Farewell Address was delivered in a television broadcast. It remains memorable for advocating that the nation guard against the potential influence of the “military–industrial complex.” Though Ike is always credited with coining the term, his smarter brother Milton Eisenhower and main speechwriter Malcolm Moos were the ones who developed Ike’s “historic” final statement. The canned and over-rated speech had gone through 20 drafts over the course of the several months that it was worked on.
We have already established the shockingly pro-Communist resume of FDR’s beloved Milton Eisenhower. As for speechwriter Malcolm Moos, well, he was just as bad, and just as “red.” Following his ventriloquist work for President Eisenhower, Moos went on to write speeches for super Globalist Nelson Rockefeller and also worked for the Globalist Ford Foundation. He capped off his career with a 7-year tour as the President of Minnesota University (1967-1974). During his university presidency, Moos openly encourage leftist “activism” and presided over the establishment of garbage Marxist “majors” in African American Studies, Native American Studies, Chicano Studies, Women's Studies, and the Center for Urban and Regional Studies.
Milton and Malcolm -- what a pair of Marxist beauties, eh? These then were the unseen ventriloquists who put the “historic” words in the dummy Eisenhower’s mouth. An excerpt:
“In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.”
Marxist Malcolm Moos and Marxist Milton Eisenhower worried that a “military-industrial complex” might one day rise to free America from the clutches of Globalism. Dim-witted 'Ike' read the script which they penned.
During the 1960s / 1970s Vietnam War era, the term “military-industrial complex” became a favorite cliché of the Marxist, long-haired, “peace-love-dope” pseudo-intellectual hippy crowd that wrongly blamed this shadowy “complex” for a war which actually originated with Ike’s deployment of “advisers” (CIA) to Vietnam during the late 1950s.
In years since, conservative patriots and libertarians have carelessly adopted the term as well. The problem is, there is not now nor was there ever any “military-industrial complex” that could “endanger our liberties or democratic processes,” for the simple reason that military generals / admirals and manufacturing CEO’s can neither take America to war, nor dictate the size of defense budgets, nor influence politicians to do so.
Sure, there may be glory-seeking military men and greedy arms manufacturers who, for obvious reasons, love war. But they do not have political power. Globalist media and banking moguls install the politicians and the politicians appoint the military leaders -- not the other way around. Seriously, can anyone cite a single instance in American history in which a general or an armaments manufacturing CEO, acting independently of the political class, dictated our domestic politics or foreign affairs? The answer is, “no,” not even close.
Contrary to Milton and Malcolm’s slogan, it is the banking / government / tax exempt foundation / academia / media / Zionist complex that represents the “acquisition of unwarranted influence” and the “disastrous rise of misplaced power.” But the Eisenhowers didn’t want to talk about that complex because it was the very same power that made them!
As Globalists who believed that the power of the UN military should one day surpass and absorb the US military, it made perfect sense to denigrate the nation’s patriotic military leaders (recall Ike’s hatred for patriotic Generals Patton, Devers, and MacArthur), -- especially the ones feeding JFK information over the concerns they had about Eisenhower’s policies -- as some sort of evil plotters. As Marxists who believed that the government should take over or dictate to private enterprise, it also made perfect sense to cast the captains of the industrial business community as "capitalist" villains.
Put them both together and what do you have? You have the evil, conspiratorial and completely mythical "military-industrial complex" --- a phantom menace that needs to be brought under the control of the oh-so-benevolent Globalists. Get it? You see, if and when America was to ever fall to a Globalist tyranny (and we were almost there in 2016) the only force that could possibly mobilize and save the day at the 11th hour would be the combined power of the business and military communities. If anti-Globalist businessmen / patriots the likes of Henry Ford, Benjamin Freedman and Robert Welch ever “conspired” for freedom with anti-Globalist military-patriots such as George Patton and Douglas MacArthur, it would be all over for The New World Order, and right quick too! And that, dear reader was the “threat” that the Globalist Eisenhowers were really concerned about – a “threat” which has since been expanded to include armed local police and lawful gun owners.
******END OF EXCERPT***********
Consistent with the theme of that excerpt from "I Don't Like Ike," we believe that patriotic elements of this "Military-Industrial Complex" (Military Intelligence and the NSA in particular) were the ones who recruited Donald Trump (their front man) to run for president, and whose special psychological warfare operatives are secretly running the pretend "Biden" administration into the ground in preparation for the coming revelations of multiple scandals, including Voter Fraud 2020.
Q Anon -- which Fake News can't stop whining about -- represents the "military industrial complex" which (((they))) have long feared could break up their conspiracy. As Q himself has posted, many times: "The only way is the Military."
1 & 2. Patriotic anti-communist Generals Patton (1) and MacArthur (2) were both HATED by Eisenhower. // 3. Businessman Trump with the generals and admirals behind him. This is the "military-industrial complex" that "Deep State" Globalists like Moos and the Eisenhower boys always feared might rise up against the NWO.
1. The New York Slimes responded very positively to his "military-industrial complex" speech. That alone proves that the words had a hidden meaning. Eisenhower was twice endorsed by Sulzberger's Slimes -- which hasn't endorsed a "Republican" ever since. // 2. Want more dirt on Eisenhower? Read: I DON'T LIKE IKE!
Globalists feared "The Military Industrial Complex"...
An Excerpt from "I Don't Like Ike"
by Mike King
JANUARY 1961: Globalist Eisenhower's Farewell TV Address Warns of the "Military Industrial Complex"
Still stinging from candidate-now-President-Elect John Kennedy’s criticism over his "missile gap," Eisenhower's Farewell Address was delivered in a television broadcast. It remains memorable for advocating that the nation guard against the potential influence of the “military–industrial complex.” Though Ike is always credited with coining the term, his smarter brother Milton Eisenhower and main speechwriter Malcolm Moos were the ones who developed Ike’s “historic” final statement. The canned and over-rated speech had gone through 20 drafts over the course of the several months that it was worked on.
We have already established the shockingly pro-Communist resume of FDR’s beloved Milton Eisenhower. As for speechwriter Malcolm Moos, well, he was just as bad, and just as “red.” Following his ventriloquist work for President Eisenhower, Moos went on to write speeches for super Globalist Nelson Rockefeller and also worked for the Globalist Ford Foundation. He capped off his career with a 7-year tour as the President of Minnesota University (1967-1974). During his university presidency, Moos openly encourage leftist “activism” and presided over the establishment of garbage Marxist “majors” in African American Studies, Native American Studies, Chicano Studies, Women's Studies, and the Center for Urban and Regional Studies.
Milton and Malcolm -- what a pair of Marxist beauties, eh? These then were the unseen ventriloquists who put the “historic” words in the dummy Eisenhower’s mouth. An excerpt:
“In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.”
Marxist Malcolm Moos and Marxist Milton Eisenhower worried that a “military-industrial complex” might one day rise to free America from the clutches of Globalism. Dim-witted 'Ike' read the script which they penned.
During the 1960s / 1970s Vietnam War era, the term “military-industrial complex” became a favorite cliché of the Marxist, long-haired, “peace-love-dope” pseudo-intellectual hippy crowd that wrongly blamed this shadowy “complex” for a war which actually originated with Ike’s deployment of “advisers” (CIA) to Vietnam during the late 1950s.
In years since, conservative patriots and libertarians have carelessly adopted the term as well. The problem is, there is not now nor was there ever any “military-industrial complex” that could “endanger our liberties or democratic processes,” for the simple reason that military generals / admirals and manufacturing CEO’s can neither take America to war, nor dictate the size of defense budgets, nor influence politicians to do so.
Sure, there may be glory-seeking military men and greedy arms manufacturers who, for obvious reasons, love war. But they do not have political power. Globalist media and banking moguls install the politicians and the politicians appoint the military leaders -- not the other way around. Seriously, can anyone cite a single instance in American history in which a general or an armaments manufacturing CEO, acting independently of the political class, dictated our domestic politics or foreign affairs? The answer is, “no,” not even close.
Contrary to Milton and Malcolm’s slogan, it is the banking / government / tax exempt foundation / academia / media / Zionist complex that represents the “acquisition of unwarranted influence” and the “disastrous rise of misplaced power.” But the Eisenhowers didn’t want to talk about that complex because it was the very same power that made them!
As Globalists who believed that the power of the UN military should one day surpass and absorb the US military, it made perfect sense to denigrate the nation’s patriotic military leaders (recall Ike’s hatred for patriotic Generals Patton, Devers, and MacArthur), -- especially the ones feeding JFK information over the concerns they had about Eisenhower’s policies -- as some sort of evil plotters. As Marxists who believed that the government should take over or dictate to private enterprise, it also made perfect sense to cast the captains of the industrial business community as "capitalist" villains.
Put them both together and what do you have? You have the evil, conspiratorial and completely mythical "military-industrial complex" --- a phantom menace that needs to be brought under the control of the oh-so-benevolent Globalists. Get it? You see, if and when America was to ever fall to a Globalist tyranny (and we were almost there in 2016) the only force that could possibly mobilize and save the day at the 11th hour would be the combined power of the business and military communities. If anti-Globalist businessmen / patriots the likes of Henry Ford, Benjamin Freedman and Robert Welch ever “conspired” for freedom with anti-Globalist military-patriots such as George Patton and Douglas MacArthur, it would be all over for The New World Order, and right quick too! And that, dear reader was the “threat” that the Globalist Eisenhowers were really concerned about – a “threat” which has since been expanded to include armed local police and lawful gun owners.
******END OF EXCERPT***********
Consistent with the theme of that excerpt from "I Don't Like Ike," we believe that patriotic elements of this "Military-Industrial Complex" (Military Intelligence and the NSA in particular) were the ones who recruited Donald Trump (their front man) to run for president, and whose special psychological warfare operatives are secretly running the pretend "Biden" administration into the ground in preparation for the coming revelations of multiple scandals, including Voter Fraud 2020.
Q Anon -- which Fake News can't stop whining about -- represents the "military industrial complex" which (((they))) have long feared could break up their conspiracy. As Q himself has posted, many times: "The only way is the Military."
1 & 2. Patriotic anti-communist Generals Patton (1) and MacArthur (2) were both HATED by Eisenhower. // 3. Businessman Trump with the generals and admirals behind him. This is the "military-industrial complex" that "Deep State" Globalists like Moos and the Eisenhower boys always feared might rise up against the NWO.
1. The New York Slimes responded very positively to his "military-industrial complex" speech. That alone proves that the words had a hidden meaning. Eisenhower was twice endorsed by Sulzberger's Slimes -- which hasn't endorsed a "Republican" ever since. // 2. Want more dirt on Eisenhower? Read: I DON'T LIKE IKE!
Incredible Q and Q+ story
How much more blatant can Trump's involvement be?
PS very sincerly . IF you are WiilieFull ignorant or other type of Magoo and cant follow what you are witnessing in this twitter post then I would be happy to break if down for you if
you just ask......
How much more blatant can Trump's involvement be?
PS very sincerly . IF you are WiilieFull ignorant or other type of Magoo and cant follow what you are witnessing in this twitter post then I would be happy to break if down for you if
you just ask......
Q has ALWAYS been designed to operate in the shadows and have only a small group of Patriots engaged.
By now, the reasons should be obvious - if Q were to reach a large audience it would be embraced as a "savior" and cause folks to become complacent while "waiting for the cavalry" to come. Also, if the movement became too popular and took on a life of its own, the Military wouldn't be able to control it.
The Military couldn't have that. The normies wouldn't be able to experience their organic awakening the way the Plan was intended. Normies needed to walk through the darkness and find the will to change and learn. Q becoming mainstream would have allowed a very lazy populace to take the "easy way" out.
No "mainstream" redpiller, who is obviously part of the Q Op, talks about Q. Not Tucker Carlson, not Candace Owens, not Elon Musk, not Joe Rogan etc. Not even Q+ himself, Donald Trump, says anything directly about Q. Alex Jones and General Flynn call Q BS... deliberately. Notice a pattern?
Only the most dedicated researchers understand the Q operation, how to use the drops and their purpose. That's because the Military knew ANONS needed to be trained in an ENORMOUS amount of information and methodologies in order for the operation to be successful and to ensure there is a group of people ready to help support the rest of humanity once [DECLAS] happens. This is CRITICALLY IMPORTANT and something that all ANONS should take very seriously. Our most significant work is ahead of us, not behind.
Q was never meant to be a predictor of events ("future proves past"), nor was it meant to be a media outlet for the general public. This is a military intelligence dissemination operation and they kept the group small by making us look like nutters and ensuring casual "dabblers" would end up confused, overwhelmed and eventually give up.
Only ANONS know the meaning of comms, dates, time stamps, mirrors, double-meanings, misinformation, misspellings, etc. and why they are "necessary"
For ANONS, it had to be this way.
By now, the reasons should be obvious - if Q were to reach a large audience it would be embraced as a "savior" and cause folks to become complacent while "waiting for the cavalry" to come. Also, if the movement became too popular and took on a life of its own, the Military wouldn't be able to control it.
The Military couldn't have that. The normies wouldn't be able to experience their organic awakening the way the Plan was intended. Normies needed to walk through the darkness and find the will to change and learn. Q becoming mainstream would have allowed a very lazy populace to take the "easy way" out.
No "mainstream" redpiller, who is obviously part of the Q Op, talks about Q. Not Tucker Carlson, not Candace Owens, not Elon Musk, not Joe Rogan etc. Not even Q+ himself, Donald Trump, says anything directly about Q. Alex Jones and General Flynn call Q BS... deliberately. Notice a pattern?
Only the most dedicated researchers understand the Q operation, how to use the drops and their purpose. That's because the Military knew ANONS needed to be trained in an ENORMOUS amount of information and methodologies in order for the operation to be successful and to ensure there is a group of people ready to help support the rest of humanity once [DECLAS] happens. This is CRITICALLY IMPORTANT and something that all ANONS should take very seriously. Our most significant work is ahead of us, not behind.
Q was never meant to be a predictor of events ("future proves past"), nor was it meant to be a media outlet for the general public. This is a military intelligence dissemination operation and they kept the group small by making us look like nutters and ensuring casual "dabblers" would end up confused, overwhelmed and eventually give up.
Only ANONS know the meaning of comms, dates, time stamps, mirrors, double-meanings, misinformation, misspellings, etc. and why they are "necessary"
For ANONS, it had to be this way.
