of course there are women anons, they're just smart enough not to be bothered pointing it out
>>1349299 welp, sorry if i reacted with a certain amount of exasperation at the 2 "are these signatures what the Q said are signatures" questions.
i guess i'm irked that
>Kind of a tangent but do you agree that the tags at the bottom of many Q posts are the 'signatures' he has referenced?
>For example: Snow White, Gofather III
used to be shared common knowledge around here…
harsh tone aside, i'm quite glad to see anons interested in them, as you can surmise from my other posts in the thread following that one.
///
>Nice compilation of signatures
just trying to repost a few of the main Q posts about Signatures, to help reconfirm their importance…
here's a work-in-progress, was working on it last ~~night~~ (week?) but too long to finish…
basically i'm taking out everything but the
signatures
but it's hard because some phrases related remove a lot of context/understanding.
but, figured i'd do a first pass and see what i'll be left with…
if anyone wants to pick up the ball:
Signatures edit https://pastebin.com/SgivjDAZ
(yeh, yeh, i know, didn't work on it since, still where it was… too much missions, not enough time)
>Q = ALICE in the sense that Q is taking us down the rabbit hole
>But when its Alice & Wonderland, that refers to HRC and SA
yes, that one confused me for so long… but this simple doublemeaning works perfectly.
>www.globaleaks.org
hmwait, wasn't that one a clown honeypot?
>please consider a bit of patience for the anons.
hehe, i do succed at patience sometimes… not always.
tough love's another form of love, i guess, lots of shills around so anons can train on "friendly-or-not-so-friendly fire"…
>who jumpstart the conversations in the 1st place
that is a damn good point, though, it did re-kickstart it. thanks…
>bury hatchet
? it never left the ground… :)
>Would be interesting to try to find a collective workspace to work on your foundation, outside of general breads.
>Maybe it's own board?
that's really just the full raw text pastebin with lines taken out, but if it can help, sure!
also, ages ago i'd done this alternate spreadsheet in hope of focusing on timestamps & signatures more in this one, but now i'm locked out of it and can't use it, too old:
Q numbers SS
https://app.smartsheet.com/b/publish?EQBCT=0bcdccc774dc43f3a541bb3ec69e592e
it could inspire a better version, though….
and yes, all for a dedicated thread for Signatures! lessss do it
>found it interesting it had a [3] immediately preceding it.
can be read as refering to the [3] letter agencies…
i'm not 100%, but i seem to recall it was linked to JP Barlow heartattacked/Snowden, etc… would have to re-read in context.
and dayum, we had a good momentum for the Sigs but a fresh Q post takes over: yet another reminder/justification for its workthread - i'm going in&out, not the best to do it
>But I'm the shill for
being such a flaming redtext alarmist about it.
wouldn't be attacked if you had a semblance of measure
>now you tickle my almonds anon.
time-limited now, as i said, but check around… as i said i'm not sure to remember correctly, but i recall that was the "storyline" i understood that drop as being in, when it came
this one came a litte bit after:
>Think BDT NYC ‘attempt’ & Barlow.
>Not stated for verification of credibility.
>Why are we still here given foreknowledge of events?
>No FBI investigation into this?
>Impossible to locate?
>Less than 10.
>Who are we talking to?
>Since Clown takedown of black_ops loc/public exposure what has changed here?
>Expand your thinking.
>This is not a game.
>RED_OCTOBER.
>Q
i understood globaleaks as being a clown front to catch leakers - but not sure, i could be wrong.
>too random as to who will be in same bread, same time.
? i just meant i'm squeezed for time, difficult to make a nice and proper thread for Signatures as warranted (have a bit more consolidated info than just make a new thread, for example, but that'd be better than nothing)
>bread owner had ability to delete irrelevant postings
oh, that was on a whole other board then, i guess. we can create threads on this one, but don't have deletion powers as anons.
>would for one, love to participate in something similar on the signatures, should that inspire you any more.
lovely, i'll let other anon(s) jump in, and/or make a thread later tonight (possibly, won't promise because plans/timetables all too often get… shifted, as we all know)
just like politics or media, another tool for the people that got comped, diverted, perverted…
no need to throw out all babies with the bathwater, it's better to get these institutions working again