>>5652686 (pb)
Anon there asks "Flight 93 Election" question..
Nice catch… Q drop 3041 writes:
"Returning 'POWER' to the PEOPLE."
Here 'POWER' in quotes matches 'force' in the "picture will be the signifier" drop.
'force' is SMASHING the cockpit doors…
I'll repost multiple posts on this below… if you've ignored it before, start reading… I might not be right on everything thing, and there are better ways to present it… and additional evidence, but most of what I'll post is close to the mark…
I think this Anon
>>5647067 (pb)
has the catch on the 12 YT Q+ posted.
(But there could be other valid meanings too.)
The 12 links match the delta on the two part tweet that concludes with the line about quickly taking control of the plane.
7:12-7:00=12
The linked video that Q always reposts says this is "NOT simply another four year election".
Why? It is the FLIGHT 93 ELECTION.
We are all ABOUT to be called upon to QUICKLY TAKE CONTROL OF A PLANE, the plane being America.
When POTUS gives the signal, we will all TELL THE TRUTH about Q, each acting as seems best. Think on your own and act.
We will deal the FAKE NEWS a deadly blow.
MOAR in comments
Since 14 Feb 19, when DJT tweeted an overt reference to "Flight 93 Election" author Michael Anton, ALL Q+ posts have appeared on days with DJT tweets that include a likely reference to "Flight 93".
17 Feb : two Q+, one "93" tweet
24 Feb : one Q+, one "93" tweet
12 Mar : one Q+, "quickly take control of a plane" tweet
See comment for the rest of the graphics.
Let's Roll! - Basic Plot
This gives the basic plot for a finale with the "Let's Roll!" meme. The finale will be the public revelation of Q. The plot here has three elements: the identification of a picture (Kitchen is HOT), the conversion of the picture into a meme (Carpet Bomb), and the response of the Q army upon deployment of the meme (Tactical Nukes).
To simplify matters, you might want to read the three main segments IN REVERSE: Tactical Nukes, then Carpet Bomb, then Kitchen is HOT. Ask yourself if Tactical Nukes makes sense? If yes, read MOAR.
(The given links provide the evidence and reasoning that support this outline, which might seem merely speculative on its own. There is far too much evidence and reasoning involved to fit into one post. That is why it is broken into multiple digestible pieces, each involving different material.)
Kitchen is HOT:
1 - A Gentleman and a Scholar: A vast array of pre-existing evidence points to "Flight 93" author and former NSC staffer Michael Anton as one of the key architects of the Q op. The fact that the fake news ignored the TRUE conspiracy and pushed all manner of hoaxes will play a role in its destruction.
>>5491602 (pb)
2 - We serve at the pleasure of the President: Anton's departure from the White House was marked as fake from the start, with anonymous sources giving
contradictory and implausible reasons for his departure, and then Anton returning to cook at the State Dinner for France.
>>5491645 (pb)
3 - Red Carpet Rollout: Multiple drops mark the State Dinner as giving a "red carpet rollout" to a MOAB.
>>5491680 (pb)
4 - Pepe the Baker: 12 Dec 18 "Pepe the Baker" drop has 1 day delta with 11 Dec 18 DJT Anton tweet, and the photo in the drop lines up with the Anton cooking photo, unlocking an array of Q symbolism in the photo
>>5548179 (pb)
5 - Launch!: 14 Feb 18 DJT Anton tweet has a weeklong rollout
>>5491753 (pb)
6 - A Footnote to History?: 14 Feb 18 DJT tweet is really part of a 17-handshake with Anton's book, via page 17 of the book. This amounts to the go signal to ID the picture, which is the 24 Apr 18 NYT photo of Anton cooking.
>>5491773 (pb)
Carpet bomb:
Contrary to the surface implication of the Q drop about a picture forcing the question about the reality of Q, no picture will work and no question will work. Careful analysis of the drop suggests that the picture must be converted into a meme, and it must be an obvious meme. In fact, the given picture forces us to choose the given meme.
>>5491805 (pb)
Tactical nukes:
DJT will tweet the meme, leading the fake news to attack him for insensitivity and leading them to propagate the meme. But the meme will signal the Q army to unleash tactical nukes (i.e. nukes used near friendly forces). Everyone will put out the truth about Q in their own manner. The Q onslaught will be impossible to ignore, and the fake news will have to report it. But then POTUS will drop the hammer.
>>5491934 (pb)
Why I think Q posed as an Anon to direct you to read the analysis above:
>>5567249 (pb)
This stuff is more speculative but related. Both need more eyes:
"Doxxing" of Mar-a-Lago #pastryninja was likely a setup by Q team to get a fake QAnon pastry chef story in the standard attacks:
>>5514294 (pb)
"I SEE a FROG" baker has Q linked vid on instagram: #bringdownthehammer #pastrychef
>>5512885 (pb)
Thanks to Anons for suggestions and evidence. I monitor for comments when I repost this. If you think anything here is mostly or partially on track, take it and run with it.
A vast array of evidence, independent of the Q operation itself, points to Michael Anton as one of its key architects.
First, on the suggestion of Peter Thiel, Anton was hired by Michael Flynn to be Deputy Assistant to the President for Strategic Communications at the NSC. Q certainly seems to fall within the purview of "strategic communications".
Next, the philosophy outlined in "The Flight 93 Election" is remarkably similiar to the central theme of Q. Q's perhaps most central slogan is WWG1WGA, and the insinuation is that we must all work together to knock out a cabal that has illicitly seized control of America and the world. But in the essay, Anton argues that we are like the passengers of the flight, who have no choice but to try to seize the cockpit, even if success is not certain. And he argues that Trump is the only option we've got, so we must unite behind Trump.
Next, Anton has a history of pseudonymous writing. He wrote "The Suit: a Machiavellian approach to men's style", under the pseudonym Nicholas Antongiavanni, and the book is itself written in the style of Machiavelli. (And what are suits but disguises?) And of course the Flight 93 essay was published under the name Publius Decius Mus, a name that was itself linked to an earlier collective pseudonymous venture, the "Journal of American Greatness". (The original site http://journalofamericangreatness.blogspot.com/ has no links, but many are restored here http://jagrecovered.blogspot.com/, but you mostly need to click the "Off Site" links.)
The initial paragraph of the notice to the readers is worth quoting in full: "The Journal of American Greatness began some months ago, to a large extent anyway, as an inside joke. At a certain point its audience expanded beyond any of our expectations. It also ceased to be a joke. Thus it no longer makes sense to continue it in its current form. No journal is meant to last forever, and this one won’t try to. We’ve decided to call it a day." Whoever wrote this is saying they started something as a LARP, but it became big and real. That sounds like an excellent candidate for someone who might wish to start something that looks like a LARP, but has been real all along.
Finally, and most decisively, Anton is a West-Coast Straussian. Straussianism itself is a political philosophy that gives particular emphasis to the idea that political thinkers, in certain times where persecution is likely, must present their ideas esoterically, via hidden meanings. West-Coast Straussianism was a particularly pro-American version of Straussianism touted by Anton's teacher Harry Jaffa (who wrote Goldwater's "extremism in the defense of liberty" speech). The most crucial historical figure when it comes to esoteric political writing is Plato, and anyone who has engaged in deep reading of Plato will recognize moves that Q makes.
All of this should have been evident to anyone investigating, but the fake news didn't, and they will suffer the consequences. As Q says: "These people are stupid."
Given the wide range of evidence that Anton was involved with Q, why would Anton leave the White House 8 April 2018, while Q was growing?
The obvious answer is that it is all part of the show.
Two different conservative-leaning outlets https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2018/04/08/michael-anton-pushed-national-security-council-days-mcmasters-departure/
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2018/04/08/michael-anton-pushed-national-security-council-days-mcmasters-departure/
report on Anton's departure, each relying on differing quotes from anonymous White House sources. But upon close reading, none of it makes any sense. Both articles quote Sarah Sanders calling Anton "one of the smartest and most talented individual I've ever worked with", a "true friend", and an "amazing chef". Breitbart has Trump calling him "a great guy" and National Interest says Trump has "nothing but good things to say about him". But the anonymous White House sources are not so enthusiastic! Breitbart has them describing him as having turned against the MAGA agenda and desparately trying to save his job, and also as "Suspect #1" when it came to leaking. And National Interest has an anonymous White House source calling him a "shill" and another saying that his status "as an intellectual" is "overblown".
So we've got variegated anonymous abuse that is refuted by Trump, Sanders and Anton's own writing:
https://claremont.org/crb/basicpage/the-flight-93-election/
http://www.claremont.org/crb/contributor-list/49/
How do Anons say it? FAKE AND GAY.
And then this leaker, overblown intellectual, shill and betrayer is allowed to return to the White House for the special privilege of cooking at the State Dinner for France!
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/24/us/politics/michael-anton-white-house-state-dinner.html
Predictably, the fake news did not investigate any of the strangeness and simply gloated:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/posteverything/wp/2018/04/10/the-flight-from-the-flight-93-election/
That WaPo article, for instance, does no reporting, but simply gloats and repeats the fake stories that the White House had fed to National Interest.
As for Anton himself, he swiftly gave an interview with American Greatness, where he had been an editor, and rejected all of the charges against him as utter nonsense:
https://amgreatness.com/2018/04/15/michael-anton-addresses-his-critics-affirms-support-for-trump/
Anyone paying attention to Anton and Q would realize there is something very very weird about the story of the State Dinner for France:
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/24/us/politics/michael-anton-white-house-state-dinner.html
And they might even notice that Anton is pictured having dropped some crumbs.
But what does Q say? Via multiple drops, Q indicates that the State Dinner will mark something big.
On 24 Apr 2018, in Drop 1258, Q says that a MOAB will get a "red carpet rollout".
Later that day, in Drop 1260, Q makes clear that th red carpet event will be the State Dinner for France.
Looking back to prior drops on 21 April, it becomes clear that Q has been preparing for this. Drops 1231 and 1232 indicate that a MOAB is coming.
Thus we have four drops in conjunction (1231, 1232, 1258, 1260) that collectively indicate that the State Dinner for France will be the red carpet rollout for a MOAB.
Looking back, there was a sign in the very early days of Q that a red carpet rollout would reveal Q. It is in the "Thank you Asia!" video posted by DJT to conclude his first Asia trip: https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/930490487903084544
Look at 0:30. What do you see?
Interestingly, this video was posted at the end of the very trip on which Trump seemed to first acknowledge Q, in the infamous "doitq" thank you to deplorables: https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/928325667556548608. What does Q say: how many coincidences…?
Will Q get a red carpet rollout? Signs say yes.
Addendum:
Although we have by no means yet definitively established this, it will turn out that Q is pointing us to the NYT photo of Anton cooking as somehow being crucial to the public revelation of Q, so it is worth looking right now at two additional clues linked to the state dinner imagery.
First, Drop 1232 tells us to fire up the memes in response to the MOAB. The "Carpet Bomb" post will establish that the picture, which might seem to be the MOAB, really must become a meme.
Next, Drop 2912 references the meme as a "carpet bomb", describing it as merely ok. It is better to have "tactical nukes", and this is discussed in the "Tactical Nukes" post
On 11 Dec 2018, DJT tweets that Michael Anton is a "true National Security expert!" Anton has not appeared in previous tweets.
One day later, 12 Dec 2018, Q responds to the "I SEE a FROG" Anon. Here it is necessary to simply look at the photos. The Anon claims to see a frog in the blond baker's jacket, and Q seems to confirm this. But that is not what is happening at all. Instead, Q is forging the link between Anton the "true National Security expert" and Anton the French baker.
The visual similarity between the two photos is clear, and even more so when we consider that "Frog" is a term for a French person.
The cooking photo depicted Anton's last appearance at the White House, and now DJT has reintroduced him in such a way that allows Q to signal the importance of the photo.
But there is more: once we see that Q is linking the photos, Q's question "PEPE THE BAKER?" becomes about Anton.
Pepe, of course, is a frog who appears in memes that convey meaning in part via the visual structure of an image. If Anton is appearing as Pepe the Baker, then the Anton photo must also be conveying meaining via its visual structure. And it is.
It is meant to symbolize Q, appearing as Pepe the Baker. Think how Pepe works. Pepe himself seems rather ridiculous. And yet many have an affection for Pepe, since Pepe is effectively used, visually, to convey ideas with much emotional resonance. Here Anton, supposedly a "true National Security expert" according Trump, appears ridiculous as a mere baker. He couldn't hack it in the White House but he got a chance to make tasty morsels?
The visual elements of the photo say otherwise. Note the reflection. Q says: "Think mirror." Note the crumbs. Is this Q dropping crumbs? Why does Q always write out the letters in P-A-I-N? So we think of the letters themselves. They don't mean the same thing in all languages. In French, those letters mean "bread". Is this a picture of Anton making tasty morsels of bread and shrimp? No. It is an image of Q bringing the PAIN.
This doesn't we need to identify Anton as "Q". Q is surely a persona enacted by multiple players. But Anton surely played a role in creating that persona and he appears in the photo as Q playing Pepe the Baker.
Addendum:
At this point, it is beyond doubt that we are on to something, but we have not yet established how this photo is supposed to figure in the show. But we need to consider Q's further line: "Think POTUS Tweet re:PEPE".
At first glance, Q seems to be referring to the Pepe tweet above. But Q certainly does not need to tell Anons who Pepe is. And surely a good chunk of the Anons on qresearch know perfectly well that POTUS has tweeted himself as Pepe. Why is Q adding something irrelevant? He isn't. He is telling us to THINK about POTUS tweeting Pepe… Pepe the Baker, aka Q.
This is a timeline of key events involving Anton.
2016 - Anton writes "The Flight 93 Election"
2017 - Flynn hires Anton for to do communications for NSC
8 April 2018 - Anton leaves the WH for dubious reasons
24 April 2018 - Anton cooks at the State Dinner for France
11 Dec 2018 - DJT tweet that Anton is a "true National Security Expert"
12 Dec 2018 - Q drop that links Anton to Pepe the Baker
9 Feb 2019 - Q has just made a drop for the first time since 1 Feb, and an Anon welcomes him back. Q says he never left, and that it is time to return publicly
10 Feb 2019 - DJT retweets an image of a panther and cheetah lounging together: https://twitter.com/planetepics/status/1094672439202758656
It is POTUS and Q, at rest and playing.
11 Feb 2019 - Anton appears on Tucker (one of the few established outlets for White House news), while Trump's Q-proof heavy El Paso rally begins on the other half of the screen. The alignment of Trump and Q is an established type of Q proof. But this is a marker, and as yet means little.
14 Feb 2019 - DJT tweets the 17-word title of Anton's book and urges that we read it. This is the crucial moment, because it is clear beyond doubt that Anton signals back, but establishing this is a subtle matter, so it will get its own post.
15 Feb 2019 - Two planes in the air! This is POTUS and Q.
The tweet comes from 1 Feb 2019, but it was established by Anons that the two planes were F-15's and that this was a marker for Feb 15.
The 14 Feb tweet is the GO signal to Anons to bring the show to an end, so long as we grasp that Anton acknowledges. This is a somewhat complex fact that gets its own post.
DJT and Anton give each other a 17-handshake. This means that Anton is acknowledging that he will play the role of Q. But we need to show this.
First, it is clear that DJT tweets Anton's 17-word title. Any 17 in a DJT tweet is an established sign.
But suppose for the sake of argument that Anton really had nothing to do with Q. He surely KNOWS about the Q movement, and would scarcely give his book a 17 word title by accident. But suppose he did. Then surely DJT would have found another way to recommend Anton's book, anything except tweeting a 17.
As for Anton, if he wants to signal a 17, the obvious way to do so in on page 17, since that is where Anons will look. What we find is utter genius, a brutal turning of the tables on the fake news.
The crucial footnote is really footnote 3. But that is attached to a line the mentions both Decius and Machiavelli. These are BOTH previous roles played by ANTON HIMSELF. When in footnote 3 Anton mentions that Machiavelli has done something, he is REALLY talking about himself.
Now let's look at both footnotes in their entirety, putting aside our current Q context. They are both utterly pointless. They both invoke number symbolism that does achieve anything whatsoever. In short, they are BOTH examples of PRECISELY the sort of NONSENSE that the fake news accuses the Q movement of being!
But what is Anton really doing? He tells Machiavelli contriving, fooling with the text. But Machiavelli is Anton. Anton is telling us that he is contriving with the text to make it the only spot where two symbolic numbers co-occur. He knows why we are there. We are looking for signal on page 17, and he is telling directly that he is fooling with the text to make sure numbers CO-OCCUR. 17 matches 17!
Anton has directly acknowledged that he is playing Q, and thus giving Anons the signal to identify the crucial picture. But we've got it.
A footnote to history? Think mirror. BOOM!
Let's Roll! - Carpet Bomb
(Also see "Let's Roll!" Basic Plot.)
The Q drop suggests that a particular picture will somehow play a role in revealing the reality of Q. Suppose, for this argument, that the picture has been correctly identified as the 24 Apr 2018 NYT photo of "Flight 93 Election" author Michael Anton cooking at the White House.
On the surface, it seems that the picture is somehow supposed to force DJT to answer the question of whether Q is real.
But look carefully. Q links to a tweet by VIPAnon (https://twitter.com/Q_ANONBaby/status/1048079911813107713), and there VIPAnon recounts how he asks Trump point blank if Q is real. VIPAnon rightly notes that Trump's answer can only mean YES. But what good does that do? It is additional confirmation for us, but it does nothing to alter the fake news narrative.
Now suppose that some picture, any picture, prompts some authority figure to ask Trump if Q is real. Suppose Trump says YES. What is the likely result? The fake news will run articles claiming that Trump has endorsed a baseless conspiracy theory. It doesn't matter how absurd the logic there is… we KNOW that is what they will do.
So when Q says "Important moment in time", he means the opposite of what most suspect. Q is pointing to the fact that Trump can OBVIOUSLY endorse the "reality" of Q and it makes NO DIFFERENCE AT ALL. VIPAnon is totally correct, but the fake news rolls on.
It won't matter how Trump answers any question, whether it is prompted by a picture or not. The fake news will continue with the "conspiracy theory" narrative.
But suppose we have correctly ID'ed the "picture" as the Anton cooking picture. Q says "The picture will be the signifier". What does the picture signify? Anton is most famous as author of "The Flight 93 Election", which argued that we have no choice but to follow Trump, charge the cockpit, and fight to take back America. Now he is pictured rolling shrimp canapes. (Most shrimp canapes seem not to be rolled, but it sure LOOKS like he is rolling them.)
Now look at the next line of the drop: "The signifier will 'force' the Q". Maybe 'Q' is not 'Question' but 'cue'. A meme can be a cue for action. Does the picture force a certain meme? Yes. The catchprase associated with Flight 93 is "Let's Roll!". The picture shows Anton rolling canapes. The text "Let's Roll!" is the OBVIOUS text for this picture. Given the picture, we can deduce the meme.
And the highlighting of 'force' provides additional evidence. The signifier itself suggests FORCE: the passengers must force open the cockpit doors, and we must force our way into control of America.
As for the final line, the meme must be a cue that spurs the Q army into action at once. In fact, "Let's Roll!" is clearly an injunction to act, a sign that the battle is on, and in the Flight 93 context, a sign that we must all strike together immediately. WWG1WGA
Let's Roll! - Tactical Nukes
(Also see Let's Roll! - Basic Plot)
Q says:
"Carpet bombs are ok.
Tactical nukes are better."
The meme is the "carpet bomb". It received a "red carpet rollout" in the April 2018 drops. POTUS will tweet the meme. But it won't yet be a MOAB, as the drops suggested, until it sets off tactical nukes.
Tactical nukes differ from strategic nukes in that strategic nukes are launched far into foreign lands, but tactical nukes are employed close to friendly forces. This suggests that Q is telling us that the meme will be an injunction for every member of the Q army to act independently, in their own realm, in their own way.
Let's think this out:
DJT will post the meme, and the fake news will be sucked into a trap. They will pounce and charge Trump wih showing shameless disrespect for the Flight 93 "victims" in a pathetic effort to manipulate his base of deplorables. They will disseminate the meme to denounce it.
But Anons will recognize the cue to attack. Each will act in his or her own way, telling the truth about Q. The greater the range and variety of attacks the better. For many this will simply involve explaining to others what Q really is. Anons skilled at disseminating memes and graphics will go into overdrive, getting the word out. Public figures and others with a following who have followed Q in silence will come clean. Anons with significant insight on this or that element of the Q op will go into action, explaining the facts in venues online and offline.
It will be impossible to ignore the onslaught, and the fake news will have to report it, and a few actual investigators will start realizing that maybe there is more to Q than they suspected. Some will quickly learn that all of this has been predicted via evidence and reason, and they'll start reporting it. We WILL be the news. "Future proves past."
Once this is happening, and the fake news is in utter disarray, and many who trusted it start to realize they've been horribly lied to, POTUS will drop the hammer.
The fake news must receive a deadly blow before anything "happens" in public. And we will strike it together. WWG1WGA
I am going to argue that Q has posted as an Anon, with the intention that I would notice the post, and comment on it, and Q would indirectly reply in a drop via a delta. My argument works best if you START with the supposition that I AM DELUSIONAL. I think that POTUS tweets secret codes to tell people to read my neglected writings on an internet conspiracy site, so I must be delusional right? I have been arguing for weeks that POTUS has ID'd Michael "Flight 93" Anton as Q, but NOBODY BELIEVES ME. Fix that thought in your head, and follow my logic.
In Bread #7021, on 3/3, I posted a nine post total revision of everything I had posted on the topic of the public revelation of Q as involving Anton/Flight 93/Pepe the Baker/Let's Roll! This was the first time I had completely rewritten everything into distinct bite-size posts that I linked together. Most of the posts made it into notables and I know some Anons read them, but not many. On 3/4, I reposted links to those posts five times.
On 3/5, 6:15 am, POTUS put out a tweet with a 93. Multiple Anons caught the reference to "Flight 93" and that went to notables. When I got on later, I reviewed those notables, hoping someone would make the connection to what I had posted, but no. I did catch that one Anon seemed to agree with my view that Anton was Q, and that was good, but I didn't think too much as I was in a foul mood, as I knew I'd have to figure out how to cite the tweet as evidence for what I'd been saying without sounding delusional.
Now take a look at the post. It says of Anton that "He is one of the more famous posters on this board." I caught that right away and found it funny, SINCE I BELIEVE ANTON IS Q. So I really DO think Anton is one of the more famous posters on this board! (I have never seen anyone claiming to be Michael Anton posting as Michael Anton, so the obvious interpretation of the post is that it is a joke about Anton being Q.) BUT NOBODY BELIEVES ME. So why would a typical Anon make a joke like that? On the other hand, Q could make a joke like that, knowing that I'd catch it and post it.
Now look how another Anon catches that the post number ends in 93. Where have we seen that move before? Most famously, in the doitq photo from 8 November 2017 (which I had in fact mentioned in my "Red Carpet Rollout" post). That is two pieces of evidence in favor of Q posing as an Anon.
The post says "Michael Anton, who in January of 2017 left the private sector to serve on the National Security Council wrote this: The Flight 93 Election." Wouldn't a normal Anon be more apt to describe Anton as a former WH official? But this "Anon" focuses on the fact that he "left the private sector". VERY ODD, since the world thinks he is in the private sector right now. But if this is Q, then it makes sense for Q to signal that Anton did NOT return to the private sector and is still on Q team. Three pieces of evidence.
I added that supposed Anon posting to the POTUS tweet and reposted my prior links, saying "Anon above is making a good joke!" (I hadn't thought this all through yet…) Nobody paid attention, but I realized I had posted while Q was posting, so I reposted in the next bread at 5:07. At 5:15 Q posted with the line "Sometimes you need a little humor." So, an 8 minute delta. Amazingly Q's post included the "Infinity Chan" logo. But "Infinity Chan" is 8ch.net. So the Q drop implicitly features an 8, and comes 8 minutes after my posting of the very odd "Anon" posting, with both my post and Q's including a line about humor.
I think this was planned in advance, with Q expecting that I would catch the fake Anon posting, and post it, and then Q would post the graphic.
And the point is that POTUS and Q want Anons (at 8ch.net/qresearch) to better understand how their ingenious operation has Q going public, and the best way to do that right now is to read what I've written. (Obviously I might be wrong in some respects, and they do not endorse my mistakes…)
(This post should be read in conjunction with whatever is the most recent version of my Let's Roll! - Basic Plot post, which will always link to the most recent version of this.)
END OF THIS MEGAPOST
Exactly. That's the post I cited.
Because POTUS has OVERTLY ID'D Q in his 14 Feb 2019 tweet, and both Q and POTUS have posted in response to my postings on this.
THEY HAVE MADE IT OVERT!
Why don't you read and think before posting?
Perhaps I do not present things in the most effective manner for all Anons, but I have yet to see ANYONE expose significant errors in my reasoning.
EVERY Anon who has seriously read anything I have written on this has been tentatively in support and NONE have offered solid objections.
I'm not a nigga, nigger.