>>2049916 (pb)
I keep saying the same thing...
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear." - Thomas Jefferson
This picture, and this Q post… I have this very odd feeling that it's not meant for us.
Q knows that there are bad actors watching this board.
Q sometimes posts things directed at them, that we have will NEVER be able to figure out because we are lacking in vital information that will connect the proper dots.
Q also knows that when these bad actors see these things, they will go "Oh shit, how the hell does he have that information?"
Q uses these messages to put the fear of god in them… possibly to act as leverage to get certain bad actors to "come clean" (as in, flip)…
I have a feeling that the particular bad actor in the image is monitoring this board and knows he's just been outed.
OUR job is not to identify the person… but to understand the hidden strategy behind the posting of the message in the first place.
So… WHO this person is, is not nearly as important as WHY the pic was posted.
What's going on here… we have a place in HK where there's this Kindergarten, where known child sex acts were taking place… and we have the subject of the photo walking towards it, or near it?
This was a sting, or a photo from an investigation, where the subject of the photo was caught going to this place… SO MUCH FUCKING TIME has been spent trying to ID the subject, that people aren't taking the time, or putting their efforts, towards reading the "story" going on in the photo… the story BEHIND the photo.
WHO, WHAT, WHEN, WHERE, WHY, HOW?
We know the (((WHERE)))… that was easy.
We know the (((WHEN))), roughly… prior to the time that the Kindergarten was closed down in that investigation… we can get a time range from archived google photos and street views…
But the (((WHO))) part? Everyone's asking the WRONG QUESTION… the "who" part is not about who is being photographed!
WHO took the photo?
THAT is the proper question!
To answer that, ask… WHAT PURPOSE could such a photo serve to accomplish?
WHY was the photo taken?
HOW did the person taking the photo know to be there to take the photo, and how did they know it would be important?
WHY did they save that photo for later?
NONE of these questions have been answered by the autists here, because we're all trying way too hard to answer the WRONG QUESTION!
Do I have any of the answers? I have SUGGESTIONS and SUPPOSITION… but my purpose here is to ask the questions to redirect the weaponized autistic energy in the right direction!
Let's get on it, folks! I will be posting this in each fucking bread, to get the discussion going in THE PROPER DIRECTION… We're gonna make this a common thread in each bread until we get some fucking satisfactory answers to THESE questions!
Who's with me?
I am highly skeptical of this R person.
As for Ident of the person being Snowden… as I said, not concerned at all with the Ident of the subject of the photo.
Answer the questions about the WWWWWH of the story behind the photo itself.
Sauce?
I noticed the same error…
I was listening from the kitchen, with zero technology at my disposal, when he said that whole thing about WI being the only state that didn't vote for Regan, and I'm like… "THAT WAS MINNESOTA!"
lol, time to Streisand-Effect that shit!
Dude, that's not "dad bod"… that's just… not…
WTF are you even talking about? "Reddit Spacing"?
If you have nothing to contribute, GTFO.
WWWWWH = Who/What/When/Where/Why/How … Sorry, i thought that would be intuitive to figure out given the context.
My point about not caring who is in the photo is that we have had nothing BUT discussion about that, and no one has a definitive answer yet… it's just too grainy and low resolution to be certain of ANYBODY… so fuck that line of questioning and go down different paths of inquiry.
1) Maybe it's not the idea that was stated, but the way the idea was presented that made it notable?
2) It's not JUST that it's "not for us", it's that we need to ask DIFFERENT questions than what we have been asking.