>>8673039
>This 'rescuing sex-trafficked children from undergound tunnels, into the medships and tent hospital in NYC' a psyop.
Thanks Anon. They certainly had me hooked. There seemed to be several independent sources of info on it—photos on twitter, anecdotes allegedly from nurses on other twitter accounts, voice recordings of supposed witnesses somewhere else.
>Anons should be able to recognize this as an OP by now and not participate.
If an Anon familiar with psyops could do a notable detailing the features of these reports that indicate they are not true, that could be very helpful for less experienced anons.
Years ago I read a few Sorcha Faal reports. I found his incredible interpretations of current events powerfully attractive but I realised that they couldn't be true, and that the reason I found them so attractive was that they told me exactly want I would like to believe in my wildest fantasies about how evil the bad guys are and how 'winning' the good guys are. I learned if reports match our wildest fantasies of what could be going on, they are likely fictional, deliberately written to appeal to that part of our nature that likes excess and extremes, 'James Bond world' stuff. It is still easy to get sucked in though.
How can someone easily determine that a report or reports, such as the various children-rescued-from-deep-underground-bunkers reports, are fake? Is there a thread in the Q Research catalog that covers this?