But I was focusing on what I said about communication of information being about the reduction of uncertainty in propositions. If you don't know what the proposition is, it is nothing but uncertainty.
How does a baby learn language?
You are on target only if you exactly know the meaning. Without the "exactness," then, yes, the symbol is meaningless.
I never said anything about exactness, which is your invention
But it is, and always has been, true that exactness in speech and writing is the acme of good communication.
Bro, please increase the contextual memory of your chatbot to greater than one paragraph. 🤣🤣🤣
If you understand communication by that definition, why do you struggle with the idea that Q team have created a form of symbolic communication that this forum is dedicated to utilizing?
Do you think it takes anons 1000 words to understand when POTUS flashes an air Q or quotes statistics with 17 or 33 in them?
Also I'm a bit surprised you think written and oral communication are exact. We have a whole branch of government dedicated to resolving disputes over the meaning of our written laws. 🤣🤣🤣
Suggestions and symbolism are a looser form of communication. Indirect. It's what the cabal has used for a long time.
Compare it to UDP vs TCP packets. Written and spoken language are TCP--validated and pretty much guaranteed to arrive. Symbolism is sent and you won't know for sure if the recipient got it.
Sometimes the communications are interpreted incorrectly or mistakenly, as you describe, but logically it does not wash that 100% of the symbolism is meaningless.
That's a good high level overview of the tiers established and what sorts of actions would fall under which tier.
TBH the only reason this case is before the SC is the leftist AGs going full retard. But it sets some nice boundaries for how the alleged traitors will be prosecuted.
It seems on this topic that too many fall prey to vague and emotive theoreticals.
The theoreticals described are vague because it lets your mind wander and fill in the blanks however one is inclined. In this instance, we have presumed that Biden would be behaving corruptly or capriciously. But under a narrow set of circumstances defined by law, Biden as POTUS would indeed be authorized to "take out Trump", or anyone else that they were legally authorized to.
So maybe it'd help to create a theoretical where most folks would find this sort of action justified.
Post 9/11, Congress passed the AUMF, which grants the President the authority to use military force against those responsible for the September 11, 2001 attacks.
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/107/sjres23/text
Now, the constitutionally of this thing is debatable, but let's just say strong evidence has emerged that person X is partly responsible for 9/11, and even openly brags about it. They are hiding out in some remote country for several years that is refusing to extradite them. They are openly planning new attacks and coordinating new efforts against the US.
Under the powers granted to the executive by the legislature, is POTUS authorized to "take out" said individual?
What POTUS is not permitted to do, and has never been permitted to do, and was not even discussed by the court, is to unilaterally order executions for no reason. This would be what is known as an unconstitutional order, which you can assume most civil officers would not follow, and would promptly be followed by an impeachment of said executive.
Those are the mechanisms we have for blocking a rogue executive and if you go much further than that, you don't have an executive at all (which the SC correctly acknowledged).
This lady and her family set off every gut instinct warning alarm I have.
Would be highly curious to hear from anyone who has Missouri expertise. There are eight candidates on the ballot--which indicates either a competitive race or intentional dilution.
https://s1.sos.mo.gov/candidatesonweb/DisplayCandidatesPlacement.aspx
What is the deal with running as Gomez over Noriega and her brother, Maicoll and Jonathan Noriega? How did he manage to get all the Columbia, Forbes, President of Romania connections at such a young age? What legitimate candidate would have that background? Trace them out all the way to the mayor of Jersey City.
https://twitter.com/maicollgomez
https://twitter.com/Jonathan_Goomez
Jonathan Gomez is aide to @StevenFulop, the Democratic mayor of Jersey City who is running for Governor.
Why does this group of siblings already have a Colombian foundation (Flor de Mayo Foundation / Fundacion Flor de Mayo) and is involved across multiple parties across multiple states? Who does this as a twenty-something as anything other than infiltration?
Is this the Colombian conservative version of the Omar family?
I'd be looking very carefully at some of the other candidates on the ballot because there are probably a couple of good ones they are trying to bury through dilution and distraction.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_Missouri_Secretary_of_State_election
The secret service email referenced in this link:
...when associated with Q posts by timestamp (2504) and date (293) suggest a possible clue as to what was communicated through the Timberwolf funeral envelopes.
References:
Basic timestamp & date connections. I haven't seen it mentioned before but it probably has been.
There's a group of pro-vaccine professionals from various backgrounds on Twitter who I'm convinced are some form of AI.
https://twitter.com/IanCopeland5
Copeland (cope-land) in particular has stated that you'd never guess where he comes from, that he's "with the Army" and is a "PHD Level Geneticist".
If you visit their space you'll notice some strange and highly predictable patterns to their format. The rules are that the "anti-vaxx" crowd can come up to "debate" the issues, but they must only cite peer-reviewed sources from the "most-respected" scientific journals. They aren't allowed to use any logical fallacies (they are immediately muted and scolded if they do), smaller scale studies, their own reasoning, or evidence from a non-scientific context (e.g. monetary or power motivations).
Conversely--and infuriatingly--the pro-vaxx panel are able to use all of the logical fallacies--and proceed to do so judiciously. They're also permitted to cite smaller scale studies & non-RCT when it's convenient, etc.
In short, it's the most unfair debate format imaginable, and is essentially unwinnable for the anti-vaxx side because no anti-vaxx study would ever be published or funded.
But what I view it as is a white-hat created debate gauntlet. A training ground where white hats can search for new angles of attack based on the outcomes of the battles. What can humans do to give the AI a brain fart in these impossible scenarios?
They also occasionally throw in a bit of bait to make things interesting and give the combatants a bit of help (e.g. the Copeland character was given myocarditis in his 30s but vehemently denies that it's vaccine related).
You have to think there's no way so many full-time professionals would find the time to host what is essentially the same space every day to no productive end. I strongly suspect it's an AI creation.
Last thing:, the AI needs "a link" to begin, and is very insistent that participants in the debate give it a link before proceeding. Imagine an AI that is given the prompt:
"interact a grossly unfair debate for the pro-vaccine side in relation to <link> and issue a <mute> and <scolding> whenever your adversary uses a logical fallacy"
^ With that you have Dr. Ian Copeland 5.
Low key the most hilarious thing is Biden apparently had COVID despite being vaccinated however many times and decided to show up at the debate without a mask, then proceeded to admonish Trump for not taking COVID seriously.
I'm a bit surprised Trump didn't hint at it.
So what if the military already has this tech? What kind of project might have used it? Is an AGI what was used to create the plan for the Great Awakening? Is it why Q always talks like they have a checkmate situation?
Looks tremendously empowering. Much more pragmatic and satisfying than even many of the best regarded Western jobs.
There's something about walking through a neighborhood and seeing the product of your work all around you. Imagine how much programs like this increase the odds of post-incarceration success.
Which do y'all figure is more likely?
-
CNN & the media are white-hat controlled and were in on the whole narrative that Joe was fine and knew it would pivot to Joe was not fine overnight.
-
CNN & the media still have agency and white hats only control Biden, and stealth bombed them with this performance.
-
It's all a coincidence and Joe Biden is real and really screwed up in a coincidental way that had to make everyone shift gears.
Option 1 overwhelmingly feels like the most likely case for me. I can't create the logical wormholes necessary to even fathom cases 2 & 3.
The rhetoric from the judges is definitely in Coomer's favor in every instance that I saw, to the point that they sound as though they're arguing on his behalf rather than judging.
But if true, why isn't Coomer blinging it up and hitting the victory circuit like E. Jean? Instead he's doing kitchen work and keeping a very low profile.
Lloyd Doggett from TX calls for Biden's resignation... 🤭