I ordered and read the book and I have to say I am pretty pissed right now as they took my digs from here and used them word for word in their book on several occasions. I didn't give a shit about their work but if they took my work and digs and copied them in exact format and exact statements then I am positive they did that to others as well. Considering I can prove I said those things, when I said them and prove when they came up (due to the site keeping records and having a nice way to keep tabs of who presents what) I am not pleased and it really pisses me off beyond belief they would pull that shit.

On one end I am telling myself to not think about it but on the other end those assholes took many hours and weeks of investigatory work, copied it word for word and now are cashing in on it. That is fucked up.

>>5536346

I don't know man, I try to steer clear of bullshit and just focus on the investigation and the work but how can I deny it is fucked up that some asshole takes someone word for word and then uses it to pretend they are a spokesperson while cashing in on it. It makes me think they probably did that to everyone who has posted a large dig here.

>>5536389

First off, fuck you about being "butthurt" about anything. When and if you ever put time into something only to watch someone steal it and make money on it you may not be happy so take your bullshit insults and fuck yourself as there is no reason to not support someone who makes that claim irregardless of anything else.

As far as the book, yeah, I mean it had a good amount of content on things that have been covered but it focuses way too much on the pizzagate and ancient aspects of that situation in terms of speculative material that is more so not a Qanon movement. Sure there are some anons that focus on that but overall we focus on Q drops and proving them through digs. I would say a good majority of the book is related to the issues that have yet to be proven which I found to be an issue and something that should not be included until they were proven.

Many of the digs that are sound are issues we have gone over and I support their inclusion which is good. I did find a serious lack of support for the country, the west in general and a complete lack of any mention of historically related issues. I would say that in terms of the fact based proofs it did a good job of relaying them but they took up a small amount of the material covered which focused on a lot of conspiracy shit which may be true but just hasn't been proven which I did not really like.

>>5536476

Yeah after reading it I was and am now certain that those people representing themselves as anons or connected to the movement have not even once done a dig on anything and all they do is take the work and report it through their Youtube channels and recently through this book of course.

Every single issue covered originated elsewhere and outside of those that I myself uncovered I know of several other anons who were the authors of issues they brought up and they used their exact statements as well. So all in all I walked away with the thought that those involved in that process are not actually investigating anything but are taking the material and spreading it. That is actually, by itself, a good thing as it's good to get the issues out there but to cash in on it while not doing anything really calls into account their true allegiance. I wouldn't be surprised if some anons who can prove that they stole their work sued them since it is blatant in my case so I am positive it is with others as well. And that right there is something I roll my eyes in thinking about because all of it didn't have to happen if they just released the book online for free instead of trying to make money. Now they are very open to lawsuit. Fuck… it never ends when idiots are involved.

>>5536520

It's already there so I have nothing to prove.

>>5536557

And that is something that is a problem as it did focus a lot on the things that do currently run on conspiracy theories without being able to be proven. Those things may be true but as it stands we have yet to prove them and those investigations are not really QAnon related anyhow and were created long before QAnon surfaced which made it even more puzzling as to their inclusion.

There was no mention of the issues from WA/missile, no mention of the issue from the Scotland golf/SS issue, no mention of serious issues that really shocked me and we proved beyond any doubt. It focused very much on many of the crazy things such as frazzledrip and so on.

>>5536644

I would be much more apt to think that way if those involved and who were cashing in were those that I could relate to in the means of them loving their country. If it was someone I actually believed to be an America loving individual who shared my hope for the future I wouldn't give a shit and, to be honest with you, I would pass off my entire 900 page work on this very issue to a struggling (financially) anon if I knew they could benefit from it to help their life since I am doing fine. In fact I will do that once the smoke settles on this issue but I simply cannot deny it bothers me that those particular people are the ones who benefited from the work given they have never once mentioned any love of country and hope for the future and everything is about themselves. That bothers me and I believe it bothers others who not only love the US but love their own countries and are hoping at a united front between our nations moving forward.

>>5536665

Oh I didn't buy it my friend. I would never pay for that. I did what everyone here (I assume) knows how to do in acquiring such things. In fact, would you all like for me to post the book?

>>5536697

Alright I will be home in 3.5 hours and will make a new post about it on the site here and just upload it all.

>>5536717

They never sourced it. They delved into topics and, from there, they used the statements word for word. For example they would bring up subject A and then from there there would be a section on subject A and within that section is where the word for word statements were placed typically (on 4/6 occasions) with those statements being the first paragraph or first few paragraphs.

>>5536717

>please provide (y o u) caps (though that doesn't really prove it.) and photos from the book of what they stole.

I am not going to provide any such material until I decide how to proceed with the issue as I have not ruled out lawsuit. I am not going to sit here and blow smoke about it and pretend it isn't an option in my mind given who they are and their allegiances. I am about 80% that I do not want to deal with such baloney and will just get over it but at the same time and judging by the shills who are trying to protect that book as if it is a good thing while not being able to understand the issues many of us have are partially convincing me that a lawsuit will chase away any future jerks who want to play this game at the cost of our time.

I really do not want to press lawsuit and it aggravates me to no end that it is even in my mind but I fear if one does not happen that this recent release will become norm and the market will become flooded with bullshit that will limit all we do. I, as I am sure (at least I hope) other anons do follow the two prong method of being able to prove we posted what we posted so that is not an issue but I am not going to open the door for them to prepare a statement beforehand.

>>5536835

No, a slide is what you are stating as you are, in essence, stating you support non anons stealing proofs to profit rather than supporting anons who did the work. No actual anon who actually investigates or researches anything would, in the slightest, make such a statement. The mere fact you are standing with Nemos, Sather and those idiots who have done nothing in terms of investigating anything or helping brethren of this country speak volumes about those who make such statements.

Let me take it a step further. Yesterday an anon asked a very serious and logical question about Isaac Kappy and that he obtained and has the data of victims of molestation which he acquired after inserting himself into the Qresearch issue. This is his response calling people "trolls" for asking about that. This is a guy who supports the book release, is connected to the people who released it and this is a guy claiming to be connected to Q research.

>>5536889

>the sliding towards "muh research"/suing is obvious

I don't agree. It most certainly fits with existing law as they clearly took it without permission to financially gain so there is absolutely a legal case and loads of legal precedent to support that if someone wanted to press civil lawsuit.

>>5536939

… and there lies the issue anon because I agree with you. So on one end we have to slap down those who aren't anons and are trying to cash in but on the other end we cannot discourage the real investigatory types. So that is where I am and I agree with you.