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.
originally posted by: daskakik
Just a few pages back, IIRC, someone brought up organ harvesting. It isn't always that drastic. That is the doom porn kicking in.
Down syndrome continues to be the most common chromosomal disorder. Each year, about 6,000 babies are born with Down syndrome, which is about 1 in every 700 babies born
originally posted by: daskakik
originally posted by: ucanthandlethetruth
I find it disheartening on an almost daily basis how much decent and normal people, even moderates, are experiencing severe cognitive dissonance and quite acting like a five year old sticking their fingers in their ears, going na na na I can’t hear you!
Maybe he is correct.
Whenever debunkers bring up Q fails it's a whole other group that acts in the way you have described.
originally posted by: Guyfriday
originally posted by: carewemust
Comey says this evening, "It wasn't spying. It was court-approved surveillance."
www.nytimes.com...
Barr needs to prove his statement.
And Comey is right. A FISA court approved the surveillance, but it was based on false evidence. So who's at fault? It all goes back to who used the false reports as evidence for the surveillance, who allowed the FISA order to go through when the first time is went in front of a FISA judge it was rejected, and finally the administration that allowed the DOJ and FBI to go in on this surveillance of a private citizen based on faulty intelligence.
From Comey's end it was legal, but from the big picture it wasn't.
The extent of this Administration’s cynicism and cruelty cannot be overstated,” Pelosi spokeswoman Ashley Etienne said in a statement Friday. “Using human beings—including little children—as pawns in their warped game to perpetuate fear and demonize immigrants is despicable, and in some cases, criminal.
originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: Guyfriday
Comey needs to "rat out" Loretta Lynch, if he hasn't done so already. She's the one who forced him to let Hillary off, TWICE in 2016.
originally posted by: EndtheMadnessNow
a reply to: ucanthandlethetruth
Odd coincidence, I was a Navy Cryptologic technician, though a side collateral duty I maintaned and repaired the crypto devices for data.
Then later half worked with FAA in a ATC center on Ford Is, Pearl Harbor and periodically flew out to all the microwave radar stations (maintenance/repair) on all the Hawaiian island mountain tops.
As to your hubby, maybe takeaway the tv for awhile or the Internet or both. He's stuck in the msm mind-control toxic swamp matrix. I feel for ya, thats a tough one.
CWM, sorry for your loss but wow he lived a good long life!
My Dad is a Vietnam Vet and knew what No Name did and hated him for it ever since along with Hanoi Jane. On the flip side he's biggly pro-Trump and says he's the best POTUS in his lifetime. Though he doesn't agree with everything DJT does or does not do.
originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan
originally posted by: Guyfriday
originally posted by: carewemust
Comey says this evening, "It wasn't spying. It was court-approved surveillance."
www.nytimes.com...
Barr needs to prove his statement.
And Comey is right. A FISA court approved the surveillance, but it was based on false evidence. So who's at fault? It all goes back to who used the false reports as evidence for the surveillance, who allowed the FISA order to go through when the first time is went in front of a FISA judge it was rejected, and finally the administration that allowed the DOJ and FBI to go in on this surveillance of a private citizen based on faulty intelligence.
From Comey's end it was legal, but from the big picture it wasn't.
If the FISA warrants were based on fraudulent evidence (which they were), then the warrants are invalid. It's like if the cops planted evidence on you, and then got a search warrant based on that.
originally posted by: XAnarchistX
a reply to: ucanthandlethetruth
what "Wins" can you accurately link to "Q" and not to someone giving an opinion on their interpretation of a "decode"?
originally posted by: XAnarchistX
a reply to: ucanthandlethetruth
what "Wins" can you accurately link to "Q" and not to someone giving an opinion on their interpretation of a "decode"?