Regarding AIM, has anyone thought through the "disinformation is necessary" angle? I don't want to suggest too much, because while I suspect that this AIM campaign is necessary disinfo (i.e., Q and AIM are both white hat), it follows that it's happening for a reason and should be let to run its course.
We have everything we need.
I suspect we've had everything we needed since James George Frazier published The Golden Bough in 1890. Perhaps it wasn't completely clear until abridged versions were released that removed his analysis of the crucifixion of Christ (linking it to Saturnalia). That was the tell.
The Golden Bough is a great MAP.
His Preface to the version that removed the Christ analysis is interesting. He is being punished for wrongthink. He claimed no ideas were changed in the new release, and implied that the similarity of the Crucifixion to mock king sacrifice ritual was COINCIDENCE and not CONTINUATION OF PREVIOUS TRADITION.
Particularly of interest is how he cites Kazars of Southern Russia as another example… HE WAS DROPPING CRUMBS IN THIS PREFACE.
https:// books.google.com/books?id=LVucDAAAQBAJ&lpg=PT13&ots=b5Es3UYDdZ&dq=a%20striking%20inistance%20of%20a%20limited%20monarchy%20of%20this%20sort&pg=PT13#v=onepage&q&f=false
If AIM always speaks the truth
And Q says disinfo is necessary
So one can be used to corroborate the other. Of course not in an obvious way.