>>2880150

>But inversion of Christian is used by Satanists for sure.

Meant to write , "inversion of the Christian cross"

>>2879943 (pb)

Some also may just have their own symbols? There are many sects.

A lot of them "will oriented" not devotion oriented; so they make and charge ~[with energy] their own symbols. "Sigels" ~

>>2880290

Identical images, one just shopped

Not a good idea for meme, unless you point that out.

>>2880335

Maurice Strong, wacky dude

Undersecretary of the United Nations

Quite a character.

>>2880277

We're already working for free, dingbat.

The price for being free. It's free.

Also, why would you need us to tell you stuff you already know? Makes no sense.

>>2880562

Well, if that's the cross you're looking at, it's Andronicus'

I should read the play. It might be a re-working; exaggeration of real history - by the haters of King Andronicus?

>>2880501

For people who have studied this and understand the context - they can see it and understand that the photo itself is the sauce.

But most people don't have the background nor the facial recognition skills to have the courage to believe it's notable

Even when "Notable" is just a suggestion/ reflexion and is not "set in stone" they don't want it there.

I think the reticence is they want to be able to show the Notables to their friends and family and not be made fun of.

The issue of the simulations - the what people call "false flags"/ the fake shootings, the crisis actors is an issue which was fought and beat down very hard in the Propaganda wars of the past.

We have our own more specific wars not with "Trump derangement" virus.

I feel it's a great achievement to even be able to write about this Greenberg issue and share research that will be archived and that many people in the world can see.

[sorry for the typos having trouble with my keyboard all day]

If the Anons don't "get it" and want to put it in Notables - then it's not ready for prime time.

Right now we are focusing on other issues?

I never care about Notables. I care that the Q team on the inside is reading it. And they know the truth.

>>2880857

>We have our own more specific wars NOW with "Trump derangement" virus.

Also, most Anons I have noticed are not up to speed on this. You find thousands on FB literally, who are very conversant researchers on this - the false flags - thousands who research and read about "Sandy Hook" and know all about it.

You don't find that among the anons that I have seen, in general. With some exceptions. They may be in the background and just don't want to write about it?

I'm not worried this material will be buried.