>>4533448 (lb)
Back again with this, BaffleBrain0?
Q replied in the negative. Nothing to "interpret" or "decode."
What's the chance you picked and chose your evidence? (The duplicate question Q was NOT replying to/) 100%
What's the chance you looked at the components you wanted to? 100%
What's the chance you have a prior agenda to prove? (R shill.) 100%
Chance that you've got disordered thinking? I'll be generous and say you should have that looked at.
I have never seen a day when the United States was not at war, technically speaking, as Anon was born after the Korean cease-fire. But this new cycle of elective wars under thin pretext, that has got to stop.
I agree. I can't contribute to it, but consider the Q-clock as Q-canonical (or, in less religious terms, Q-valid).
Yeah, well, I'm waiting for the people claiming that Q is a hoax to post on their own media what Q is going to say at a particular date and time, and then do exactly that.. Seems a simple enough test. Or is there a reason they can't? Haven't really followed this claim too closely.
No, Anon. The red pill came as a slow drip long ago. Presidents and politicians supposedly had access to the best and brightest, most educated talent around. Why, look at all those Colleges and Universities! Yet, when solutions seemed obvious, those people in charge kept making the stupidest decisions possible! Something was wrong, but what?