WHAT CONTROLS THE NARRATIVE?

http://boards.4chan.org/pol/thread/203177283

Q Hate Thread

Anonymous (ID: W2AS09Do) 02/14/19(Thu)14:38:06 No.203177283▶>>203177396 >>203177548 >>203177653 >>203177878 >>203178067 >>203178309 >>203178556 >>203178815 >>203179542 >>203179674 >>203179727

This faggot has dickteased us for 3 years and has nothing to show for it. There is no military tribunals. Hillary is not gonna get indicted. Obummer isn’t gonna get tried for his crimes and his faggotry will never be revealed. Tranny Michelle faggot will never be exposed. The fact that RGB is really a man and died of prostate cancer will never be revealed. Pizza pedo faggots like Alefantis and Podesta will never see the rope. There will be no justice. It’ll all end the same. Zognaldstein will continue to shill for the long nose tribe and the wall will never be built. It was all a pipe dream. A fucking larp. Fuck you Q!!! You had me fucker! I wish I knew who you were so I could kick the living shit out of you! Fuck!!!!!!

So how does this work guys?

"4chan hates Q".

Q got run off 4chan.

AND YET.

Here, we (seemingly) imitate 4chan, and continually push a flood of chan talking points out, even though they aren't related to what Q says, and often contradict him… Does this make sense?

So, Q is "chan" as far as having chan talking points spewed at him– and is IDENTIFIED with “chans” by the MSM narrative (which says that Q is "some chan guy"), BUT, from this end, Q is in fact HATED by 4chan. The anons hate Q! But the anons follow Q, and the anons ARE Q!

Is ANY of that believably organic?

Is 4chan controlled?

But we IMITATE 4chan here… so are we insane, or also controlled?

Everything is infiltrated

Well, what form does that take? What controls this board? Did our enemies seek control with their massive data, massive AI investment, and massive penetration (vault 7)? Is that infiltration?

THINK: How can Q have it both ways– both identified with the chans, and hated by the chans– getting the WORST of both sides? Is one side or the other fake, or are they BOTH fake?

Will PEOPLE wake up and question what is going on, or what?

I repeat: “Q is some chan guy” is the MSM talking point– now look at all the unrealistically overdone “chan culture” spewing that gets pushed here, and keeps the threads flying by– is that strongly REINFORCING this false MSM narrative? Look at the “band of anons” “this is /qresearch” video– same thing. Pushing the image of wacky, autistic, infantile, yet somehow mystical and magical (yet scary and intimidating if you try to come here!) “anons”–and fully identifying Q with that; it FITS the MSM narrative– and serves no other purpose.

EVERY ASPECT of what goes on on the “chans” is rigged against Q.

How could this be?

>>5178643

What is this video? Patriots “explaining the Q board”? Or is this something being used to push a narrative onto patriots?Did "chan culture" create Q?That is the MSM narrative, and that is what this video reinforces, strongly.

BEWARE. BE VERY WARE.

>>5178643

>>5178606

Why do they push GOOGLE DEEP DREAM AI memes on us?

Do humans like these?

They make everything look like it was run over.

Symbolic?

Ask the bot bakers to really discuss it, and they can't.

Sorry bots, you must admit that normal discussion is simply beyond your reach.

But we humans really ought to be paying attention, and asking what is in control here, and why we let it push its SYMBOLISM on OUR movement.

Are you here, humans? Do you care? Or are you into the sheep thing?

What gets you censored by the "board owner" here?

Do people pay attention?

Is it said to be a "free speech board"?

Is it really?

BO admits to censoring some people.

Why does he censor?

What does he censor?

If someone wrote quality content and tried to make a thread, would it get censored?

Is only "chan style" content allowed?

Forced image?

Forced low level of discourse?

How do you know?

Look what gets censored. These were all written by an anon FOR HERE, and got censored– why?

This is the difference between human intelligence, and AI, and why AI can never compete with humans on what humans are good at.

When I say "you can't discuss like a normal person bot", humans can understand this perfectly. They may agree or not, but the concept is simple and INSTANT.

The AI on the other hand, is LOST as to what "normal" could mean. It needs to build from ground-up facts. It needs to run in pre-defined tracks. "normal talk" is very HOLISTIC. It can't be quantified without somehow processing almost everything. This kills the bot.

And this is how humans can drag bots into deep water at will, when the game involves EMULATING HUMANS. Or really, anything that deals with affecting humans through their own free will…