It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

TH3WH17ERABB17 -Q- Questions. White House Insider's postings -PART- -14-

page: 117
130
<< 114  115  116    118  119  120 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 20 2018 @ 03:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: CoramDeo

originally posted by: pteridine
a reply to: CoramDeo

POTUS Mimics Anon's Tweet About Building the Wall; Adds Nat Security Enabling Army Corp. Engineers
2593
Q!!mG7VJxZNCI 12 Dec 2018 - 11:22:53 AM

twitter.com...📁
Excellent Q, VIP Patriot!
twitter.com...📁
NAT SEC had to be included for reasons I'm sure you can understand.
Think Green/Red Castle.
Think MIL.
Happy Holidays!
Q

Red Castle is corps of engineers insignia www.usace.army.mil...

Then there is
US Army Corps of Engineers
US Department of Defense
Us Highway 231 North
Greencastle, IN 46135




I'm well aware of every single one of the points that you are making. What I'm saying is, the military cannot, by fiat, or by order of President redirect funds allocated to specific programs.

We had this discussion when the Omnibus bill passed. I spent hours going through every line to find something that would give a clue that there was some vagueness in any of the line items that would allow for construction of a wall.

Unfortunately, there is no vague line items. In fact, each line items is so specific that it boggles the mind that someone is that specific. Literally, the line items specify who gets how many vehicles, cases of ammunition, etc.

So with it being that specific, someone, somewhere, should be able to point to the place where funds can be moved or have been directly allocated to build the wall. It's easy. Just point to the page in one of the two documents in my previous post. Or, If it's somewhere else, codified, I'll take that as well.

If it was that easy to do it that way, then why has it taken two years for that to not happen?

The reality is that you can't just re-allocate funds in the military budget for things like this. Each one of those line items pays a military contractor for the goods or service being provided, for the salaries of DoD personnel, or services that support our men and women in uniform. So, if what Q says is true, which it is not, then someone is getting screwed; either the men and women in uniform, or some civilian working for a contracted agency (Boeing, Raytheon, BAE, etc.) will have to do with less, maybe even their job, as a result of such a decision.

I'm sorry, I'm hard pressed to believe that there are billions of dollars in discretionary spending just floating around waiting to solve a problem. If that were the case, then why have a budget?

I'm really asking to be proven wrong here, but I'm not going to take the word of Q with absolutely no corroborating evidence to contradict my point.


Cor, If I'm not mistaken "The wall" is the soldiers at this point, coupled with areas already under construction from prior obama comits. The wall won't be completed any time soon as a wholesale effort, so wall indicates blockade, not necessarily funded contractor construction - it is needed now not ten years form now.

So where does "active war funding" arrive in the inbox of disbursements RE: the listed agencies? I'm actually not sure how "money' is budgeted for a war when one has no idea what is needed. So there has to be a mechanism that allows a war to have infinite money in order to prevent "uh, over budget, we have to go home..."

National Security is the issue and what that triggers. Consider the "budget" is published, but how absurd would it be to publish the war budget.

ADD: It would seem that some of the issue is the land itself - states rights etc. The gov can, but should not, just rage onto land and start doing X - U1 Oregon for example. I don't know the details, but part of the allocation issue has to be tied up in that too.
edit on 20-12-2018 by crankyoldman because: clarity of mind means changing it




posted on Dec, 20 2018 @ 03:19 PM
link   
WTH?

BREAKING: Spokesperson at Gatwick Airport in London says that passengers should not come to the airport "for the foreseeable future including tomorrow" as airport remains closed - Sky News
12:07 PM - 20 Dec 2018

Someone coming, going or other?



posted on Dec, 20 2018 @ 03:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: crankyoldman
WTH?

BREAKING: Spokesperson at Gatwick Airport in London says that passengers should not come to the airport "for the foreseeable future including tomorrow" as airport remains closed - Sky News
12:07 PM - 20 Dec 2018

Someone coming, going or other?


I thought it because of the drones over the runway.



posted on Dec, 20 2018 @ 03:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: 0311Warrior
a reply to: Sabrechucker

Different.

Near coordinates (31.5934249, -111.6434817)

Footage is not recent.

Sites Contained.
PCPs secured.


Strange place for watering hole. Though I guess could be Rancher property. Which there is a house structure that looks outta place along with a nearby ranch.



posted on Dec, 20 2018 @ 03:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: CoramDeo

originally posted by: pteridine
a reply to: CoramDeo

POTUS Mimics Anon's Tweet About Building the Wall; Adds Nat Security Enabling Army Corp. Engineers
2593
Q!!mG7VJxZNCI 12 Dec 2018 - 11:22:53 AM

twitter.com...📁
Excellent Q, VIP Patriot!
twitter.com...📁
NAT SEC had to be included for reasons I'm sure you can understand.
Think Green/Red Castle.
Think MIL.
Happy Holidays!
Q

Red Castle is corps of engineers insignia www.usace.army.mil...

Then there is
US Army Corps of Engineers
US Department of Defense
Us Highway 231 North
Greencastle, IN 46135




I'm well aware of every single one of the points that you are making. What I'm saying is, the military cannot, by fiat, or by order of President redirect funds allocated to specific programs.

We had this discussion when the Omnibus bill passed. I spent hours going through every line to find something that would give a clue that there was some vagueness in any of the line items that would allow for construction of a wall.

Unfortunately, there is no vague line items. In fact, each line items is so specific that it boggles the mind that someone is that specific. Literally, the line items specify who gets how many vehicles, cases of ammunition, etc.

So with it being that specific, someone, somewhere, should be able to point to the place where funds can be moved or have been directly allocated to build the wall. It's easy. Just point to the page in one of the two documents in my previous post. Or, If it's somewhere else, codified, I'll take that as well.

If it was that easy to do it that way, then why has it taken two years for that to not happen?

The reality is that you can't just re-allocate funds in the military budget for things like this. Each one of those line items pays a military contractor for the goods or service being provided, for the salaries of DoD personnel, or services that support our men and women in uniform. So, if what Q says is true, which it is not, then someone is getting screwed; either the men and women in uniform, or some civilian working for a contracted agency (Boeing, Raytheon, BAE, etc.) will have to do with less, maybe even their job, as a result of such a decision.

I'm sorry, I'm hard pressed to believe that there are billions of dollars in discretionary spending just floating around waiting to solve a problem. If that were the case, then why have a budget?

I'm really asking to be proven wrong here, but I'm not going to take the word of Q with absolutely no corroborating evidence to contradict my point.


Kind of makes you wonder how the Pentagon "lost" all of that money if everything is so specific.



posted on Dec, 20 2018 @ 03:41 PM
link   
a reply to: Sabrechucker

affirm for “airstrips”

Can’t say location names 🙄 due to opsec. Wish I could.
Gonna have to write a book one day



posted on Dec, 20 2018 @ 03:45 PM
link   
a reply to: crankyoldman

I understand where you are coming from, but the wal is the wall is the wall. It's a physical barrier that needs to be funded. Not troops that are removed with the next no-boarder administration. And not a "virtual fence" Raytheon boondogle promised by the Shrub back in the good old days with sensors and drones.

Real funding for wars also has line items and money directed specifically for the effort.

Just using the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as an example:



FY2003 Supplemental: Operation Iraqi Freedom: Passed April 2003; Total $78.5 billion, $54.4 billion Iraq War
FY2004 Supplemental: Iraq and Afghanistan Ongoing Operations/Reconstruction: Passed November 2003; Total $87.5 billion, $70.6 billion Iraq War
FY2004 DoD Budget Amendment: $25 billion Emergency Reserve Fund (Iraq Freedom Fund): Passed July 2004, Total $25 billion, $21.5 billion (estimated) Iraq War
FY2005 Emergency Supplemental: Operations in the War on Terror; Activities in Afghanistan; Tsunami Relief: Passed April 2005, Total $82 billion, $58 billion (estimated) Iraq War
FY2006 Department of Defense appropriations: Total $50 billion, $40 billion (estimated) Iraq War.
FY2006 Emergency Supplemental: Operations Global War on Terror; Activities in Iraq & Afghanistan: Passed February 2006, Total $72.4 billion, $60 billion (estimated) Iraq War
FY2007 Department of Defense appropriations: $70 billion(estimated) for Iraq War-related costs[2][3]
FY2007 Emergency Supplemental (proposed) $100 billion
FY2008 Bush administration has proposed around $190 billion for the Iraq War and Afghanistan[4]
FY2009 Obama administration has proposed around $130 billion in additional funding for the Iraq War and Afghanistan.[5]
FY2010 Obama administration proposes around $159.3 billion for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.[6]


The wars are funded directly, by appropriatins or amendments to the budget. There's nothing open ended about it.

I understand where you are coming from with there has to be some way to react to situations that are fluid and unprdictable. We're not waiting for funding to defend our nation if we have to, but as you can see from the list above, it doesn't take long for congress to throw money at a war through legislation, as long as the war is on someone else's land, not our own.



posted on Dec, 20 2018 @ 03:49 PM
link   
a reply to: 0311Warrior

You Should. Arivaca is all kinds of weird. What's going on there on 4th ave, between 3rd st and 4th st



posted on Dec, 20 2018 @ 03:51 PM
link   
Good news for our soldiers in Afghanistan. The Trump Administration is considering pulling out of that country, as well as Syria.

mobile.twitter.com...



posted on Dec, 20 2018 @ 03:58 PM
link   


Kind of makes you wonder how the Pentagon "lost" all of that money if everything is so specific.


I would love to know that, too.

I was actually shocked to see how specific it was.



posted on Dec, 20 2018 @ 04:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: 0311Warrior
a reply to: Sabrechucker

affirm for “airstrips”

Can’t say location names 🙄 due to opsec. Wish I could.
Gonna have to write a book one day


That would be cool. I could write a book on this thread. Greatest story ever told since the Bible.

*Sabre - for those that live in the North and/or never lived in the deep Southwest one would discover ALOT of weird things.
Culture is different, different way of life. Last frontier of the Wild West, majority are good people though.
Border towns unfortunately fell into the cross-fire of corruption & inequality.



posted on Dec, 20 2018 @ 04:14 PM
link   
a reply to: EndtheMadnessNow

Slightly NW (coordinates) mostly W.
Hidden in plain site. How? Tarantulas.
edit on 20-12-2018 by 0311Warrior because: Burrowing



posted on Dec, 20 2018 @ 04:20 PM
link   
imagine being so brainwashed that you support building walls to keep you in, imagine if Hillary or Obama wanted to build a wall, all the Patriots would be crying about the "Illuminati" and "New World Order" locking us inside walls etc, they would say Obama or Hillary are communist Islamic dictators etc



posted on Dec, 20 2018 @ 04:20 PM
link   
This article may be of interest to someone...

www.dailywire.com/news/39553/sacha-baron-cohen-stumbled-upon-possible-pedophile-amanda-prestigiacomo

www.dailywire.com...


Amanda Prestigiacomo December 20, 2018 Showtime host Sacha Baron Cohen revealed Wednesday that he stumbled upon what he thought could be a possible pedophile ring while taping his controversial summer series "Who is America?"



During a classic Baron Cohen-style fake interview, the comedian plays a character named Gio who eventually asks a Las Vegas concierge to get him an underaged boy as a "date." After this concierge offered to put "Gio" in touch with a person who apparently procures such boys, Baron Cohen turned the troubling footage over to the FBI. "We were shooting some of this at the time of Harvey Weinstein. We wanted to investigate how does someone like Harvey Weinstein gets away with doing what ... get away with criminality, essentially. And the network that surrounds him. We decided that Gio would interview a concierge in Las Vegas," Baron Cohen explained to Deadline.



"During the interview, I revealed that basically Gio has molested an eight-year-old boy," he continued. "Now, mind you, this is extreme comedy and we thought that the guy would leave the room. Instead, this concierge stays in the room and I go, listen, you’ve got to help me get rid of the problem. And this guy starts advising Gio how to get rid of this issue. We even at one point talk about murdering the boy, and the concierge is just saying, 'well, listen, I'm really sorry. In this country, we can't just drown the boy. This is America we don’t do that.' And then, in the end, he puts me in touch with a lawyer who can silence the boy." Baron Cohen then asked the concierge about getting him an underage boy as a "date":



posted on Dec, 20 2018 @ 04:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: RelSciHistItSufi
a reply to: EndtheMadnessNow

Or maybe he was the only one eligible to serve FBI warrants on his own offices?



Look like a few was miss in the first round up

Taking out the last off the Garbage



posted on Dec, 20 2018 @ 04:24 PM
link   
a reply to: PokeyJoe

SSDD as far as their narrative goes. They know no other plan, as they expected the "usual"public compliance. Wrong. Globally you see the spokes being ripped off their wheels, but still they repeat the same tired narrative. Astonishing really.



posted on Dec, 20 2018 @ 04:26 PM
link   
a reply to: 0311Warrior

Pretty clear trails from this and two other nearby watering holes up in the mountains to this complex:



All of this is in a very out of the way place.



posted on Dec, 20 2018 @ 04:26 PM
link   
a reply to: CanadianMason

Also 2 Marker posts today...

#2631 is a 5 minute MARKER after #2630 meaning important in relation to the recent past.

#2634 is a 1 minute MARKER after #2630 meaning important in relation to IMMINENT ACTION.



posted on Dec, 20 2018 @ 04:33 PM
link   
a reply to: jadedANDcynical


Sabre - whole town is qurious

JNC -



posted on Dec, 20 2018 @ 04:33 PM
link   
a reply to: EndtheMadnessNow

Interesting EMN, thanks!




top topics



 
130
<< 114  115  116    118  119  120 >>

log in

join