dChan
Anonymous ID: 66ac73 Jan. 4, 2019, 4:41 p.m. No.4600794   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>0905

>>4600547 (lb)

 

Thanks for the effort with 1.

 

  1. so an anon can search through it?

 

  1. Thanks so much for the info on Q. Anon isn't looking for Q. Anon is looking for people who claimed to be in support of Q.

 

Without being too sarcastic or rude… anon feels these questions have more to do with controlling than assisting with info.

 

Happy to share my thoughts if you want to know them, but that should always be a side-thing to the sharing of information.

 

If someone collected these, I would LOVE to see them.

 

In case you were genuinely just curious….

 

I believe there is information in there that has proven to be correct. I believe that Q is afforded luxuries that others are not. I believe that Q, and Q's log in credentials, could be considered SAPs. There are people who could have supported the mission who didn't have special access. There is information that could have been provided that was so sensitive linking it directly to Q would have jeopardized the mission… it could have been too truthful at the time for where we were in the plan; afterall, one major component of this is to awaken the masses slowly, and some things may not have fit well at the time. They may have been there to subconsciously prepare us; we'd have no problem dismissing them at the time- it's not even Q so who cares, but when it comes out later, we'd have a harder time dismissing it, because we at least ran it through the register once. The sensitivity of the topics could have necessitated extra layers of plausible deniability.

 

Anyway, I joined the fight in July. It was a couple months before I started on here. Before then I picked two decoders I trusted and watched every single video they made. Thing is they started in Jan and March. I'm going back through the early birds, and from what I'm seeing so far, I believe the boards are fucking loaded with Moar than we know. I know I'm in the minority. History and I like it that way

Anonymous ID: 66ac73 Jan. 4, 2019, 5:01 p.m. No.4601095   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>1179

>>4600905

>>4600969

Went back and looked. You're right. I should have been more clear.

I'm actually looking for para Q. Not Q per se, but anyone outside of the official Q (so I guess what you're describing counts too). I think at the time it would've been easy to dismiss, but I think some of them now may clearly pop out as "insider" and I think there may be a crumb in every one of those.

 

How many people on Nov 9 2017 knew 4 10 20 meant DJT. 4 10 20 10 18 I'm guessing by a non-Q, then, understandably, wasn't given due dilligence. Same with VQC+++. Just wondering how many others like that there were.

Anonymous ID: 66ac73 Jan. 4, 2019, 5:09 p.m. No.4601211   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>4601061

Wonder if they ever tried it on the North Korea Parade crowds.

 

There was a piece about Jacksonville Sheriff's office doing this with social media in 2016. Not sure what's different.