1145
Apr 13, 2018 10:07:44 PM EDT
Trust POTUS.
Sparrow Red.
Missiles only.
Intel good.
Q
Sparrow Red might refer to this Novel/Film called Red Sparrow: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Sparrow_(novel)
It's about double-agent CIA synesthesia assassins from Russia, I guess.
Is the name switch up intentional? I think it might have been done to establish an acronym.
Running down the left-hand side, there is a possible acronym: TSMI
Acronym Definition
TSMI Tax Systems Modernization Institute
TSMI Total Stock Market Index
TSMI Transportation Systems Management Inc. (Canada)
All seem relevant to today.
But, here's something freaking sinister.
If TSMI means Tax Systems Modernization Institute
That institute is funded by the IRS per this document: https://www.princeton.edu/~ota/disk1/1995/9501/950111.PDF
The IITRI, who hosts the TSMI with the IRS as the sponsor is a "GLP-compliant preclinical contract research organization (CRO)" out of Chicago (everyone's favorite pit of corruption).
IITRI specializes in GLP toxicology and safety studies, IND-enabling programs, infectious disease vaccine and therapeutic development, and inhalation toxicology programs for the biotech, pharmaceutical, and government sponsors.
Question: Why was the Tax Systems Modernization Institute research being undertaken by a virology lab!?
The lab was founded in 1936, around the same time the IRS fired up. It was originally known as the Armour Research Foundation.
They started research into programming algorithms in 1961! Way ahead of the technological curve. Makes you wonder how they went from programming to virology -- Oh wait, not unless they were making viruses/vaccines as programs using computer models, like Bill Gates' "Operating System Updates"
Oh, and get a load of the address:
10 West 35th Street. Chicago, IL 60616
Wowzers! A 666 right in the address, huh?
Now the lab seems intent on Covid research now. Seeing how the Q post was in 2018, I think this is a proof that Q knew about the pandemic way ahead of time, and possibly the ones responsible for its manufacturing.
Is it possible it was cooked up in the U.S. at this lab and given to the Wuhan lab to blame China and force a Xenophobic narrative of asian-hate? Maybe. I'm not ruling it out yet.
I think this is a big dig I stumbled upon, all because Q wrote Sparrow Red instead of Red Sparrow.
No coincidences?
Frequencies in the 5G range (and wifi, cell phone, radio, tv, microwave etc., etc.) all do a similar thing when they interact with the molecules of our body. They cause them to vibrate. The amount of vibration is dependent on the intensity (number of photons) and the frequency (energy of each photon). Vibration is the same thing as heat.
There have been numerous studies on these vibrations, and potential health impacts of the increase in heat. More studies should be conducted, especially on the new frequency range we are using called 5G. The frequency itself is fine. We get hit with this frequency of light all the time (like all other frequencies). We are constantly bombarded with photons of all these energies from all sorts of sources, not the least of which is the sun. It is the intensity at any one particular frequency that needs to be studied.
If there is a problem with 5G it will be an intensity problem, not a frequency problem.
I'm agreed in that the most significant risk will be due to an intensity problem, for sure.
Most studies only use a single source and a single receiver to measure the effects of 5G radiation.
They never account for thousands of devices simultaneously pinging the towers in and endless data stream.
In a future world where even a toaster will be running on a 5G network, isn't it more than likely an intensity issue will arise?
Something else to keep in mind is that not all minerals/chemicals/structures vibrate equally given a frequency.
Resonant frequency is a thing, and it isn't unrealistic to assume switching a strong enough series of pulses set to the right frequency can cause a cascading effect in choice structures of the body.
In other words, I'm not ruling out the brown note being a real thing.
The higher the energy, the shorter the effective range, at least in these low energy ranges that we are discussing. (Concerns change once you get into ionizing radiation). In the case of 5G or wifi etc. the effect drop off is significant. This is why you lose your wifi if you go a couple houses down. For 5G its even worse.
So to test say, one source that is equivalent to the largest source in a normal setting is probably sufficient, because all other sources would likely not even come close to adding up to that one close source. Now, I am not saying that's true, and I absolutely advocate testing because that is the only way to know for sure, but for preliminary tests its very reasonable to assume it is sufficient to start.
Long term effects are another issue entirely. These are also things that need to be watched closely. Even long term effects of wifi need to be tested. Everything needs to be tested, because biology is very complicated and we understand very little of it in many real world regimes. However, there are fears that are reasonable, and fears that are not (even if they deserve more testing).
True, but the amount of vibration 5G has on molecules (any molecule) is very, very small, at least for any individual photon. Even in high intensity its not going to do much. That doesn't mean there is no intensity where it can be damaging, nor does it mean long term effects are of no concern, but its just a bit higher than the wifi band (5Ghz for wifi, 30Ghz for 5G). Such frequency range increase is really not very much. Its like singing two octaves higher. Its not going to bust any ear drums.
5G, and most communications, use frequency modulation. To set up resonance in anything requires a very narrow band frequency with no modulation. There can be multiple resonances, but they are all at specific frequencies.
I rule nothing out. I always accept evidence and I know that I know nothing. But having studied a great deal in all areas of human scientific endeavor I have things I consider reasonable fears, and things I do not.
In the case of 5G I think more testing is warranted, but things like "resonant frequencies that break down biology" are not one of them. Resonant frequencies are too precise, and biology is not that fragile nor that sensitive to specific low energy frequencies. Once you get into higher energy frequencies (ionizing radiation) its a whole different ball game. Sonic frequencies also have potential. But for 5G, long term (or medium term) deleterious heat effects are the only thing I am currently putting in the maybe column.
Fair enough.