>>8788915 (pb)

>>8788347 (pb)

>Grabs huge target and places it on back

You're a shill, but I'm going to respond because anons need to see this as well. Anons need to learn to take things apart in the interest of analysis, and presentation of irrefutable evidence. I've struggled with this myself, and learned lots of lessons lately (the hard way) by having folks simply poke holes in an argument or statement that I, personally, took on as belief instead of having any real evidence for claims. If what anons are doing here is going to progress over the next few months in a direction where folks like "you and I" are going to be tasked with spreading the message to people looking for answers, having this perspective may help in that regard.

This is going to be long. Sorry, no other way to do it.

Anons have collected pages, screenshots, backups, tweets, art, media, and government documentation that can help point anons in a direction to gain knowledge of how to interpret everything anons have gathered. Anons know the gov't knows "something" about all these people. Anons also know the gov't, in many high-level, and very key positions, are/were absolutely compromised. Anons know of what Q is trying to show us. Anons know of some of the details of these sick people's personal lives. However, if you step back a moment, and use your imagination, an argument could be made that all of this can be construed in a way to make anons believe a version of things in which they truly have no real knowledge. No, none of the anons do. Anons think they know, but they really cannot know. We're "not in the club", remember?

Q and team could simply drop the shit that proves everything, and round the bastards up (once all the institutions are cleaned up, that is). They won't, which is why anons are piecing all this together to help try to make sense of the evidence these evil people have left behind, and in our faces, of all the shit they believe in, and practice. In short, until verifiable, undeniable, comprehensive, and irrefutable evidence is provided to the people of the world, of these sick people's crimes that anons are under the assumption of, in the end, anons are still working on assumptions of what anons think they know of. The hardest of skeptics, the most plugged in, and the hopelessly blue pilled people will simply dismiss it. Many people simply do not want to believe any of this, so they will refuse, pull up their favorite streaming service/blu-ray, and have a drink and keep on believing what they want.

The documentary covers subject matter anons know to be true; or at least as anons think they know to be true. Many personalities in the world have come forth and accused many of sexual misconduct, and worse, when you consider the ages of victims involved. Q has provided anons with enough material to draw the conclusions that crimes against children, human sacrifice, cannibalism, and SRA is real in these circles of people with money/power. Pic related. Sure, the "princes of Hell" is conjecture, but the pic and the crumb are Q's doing. Speaking of Q, Anons think they know who Q is. They really don't, though anons have a pretty darn good clue as to who and what they have access to (NSA, Oval Office, The President, etc.), but anons still don't know exactly who Q really is.

>What is No Such Agency - Q group?

The documentary flashes evidence of their claims while also telling folks how to get it for themselves. Now, let's talk about you and the documentary a sec, Mr/Mrs Shill. Exactly where did you bother to debunk any of the claims made? Did you go and look for verification of the evidence provided, or have you in the past? Yes? No? Maybe? If you are going to attack the documentary, then do so on the merits of research and evidence that prove their claims wrong. Oh, this is the hard part, right? Did they produce anything other than an interpretation?

pauses for effect

…

Actually, no; they didn't. They gave first had interpretations of things they've observed throughout their careers, and presented an intersecting storyline of how their life experiences "puzzle together" a narrative of some really sinister shit. Did they actually prove anything? No. They exposed the viewer to some really interesting stuff about the CIA and media/music/television; these are detailed in gov't documents we have to take on and believe as factual. Many anons don't have a problem with that. Some anons don't believe a single fucking thing the gov't provides as information. So, you probably won't convince those hardline skeptics of anything. The people in the documentary made some convincing claims about the role of Satanism to these people, but those claims, as they even say in the documentary themselves, appeal to a particular audience's confirmation bias. If you wanted to cast doubt on the documentary, this is how you'd do it.

You'd offer an alternative explanation to the evidence they provided to base their claims on. You didn't do that. You attacked a journalist who they themselves claim were well respected, and "going places" until they started reporting on these findings; like pizzagate. You called her "cheesy, ambitious bleached blonde" and implied she's a whore. What this really means is you have nothing. No source, no evidence to the contrary; zilch. Nadda. You didn't even try. You went straight for the ad hominem. That's some weak shit.

Again, If you wanted to cast doubt, real doubt, on the content, then you'd address the previous points by saying something to the effect of "The people that put in the research and personal testimony provide their interpretation of events and facts as they see them. Example:

Not a single person in the documentary said they personally witnessed anything they've claimed, at all, first hand.

pauses for effect

…

…

They are leveling accusations and building a narrative with some circumstantial evidence, yes. It was well put together, easily digestible, and perhaps will become a really great tool to get many more "in the know" in order to get the real truth spreading. However, none of them have seen anything to support their claims, first hand. Had they, they'd probably not be around to talk about it (another assumption, of course). Grotesque behavior beneath the lowest scum on the planet. Absolute heresy. Crimes against CHILDREN. They provided exactly ZERO first-hand evidence to support their claim. The only real way to prove their claims is to produce evidence of them; pictures, video, etc. Want to cast doubt? That's how you do it.

So, in the end, we're still supposed to "take their word for it", so to speak. I'm not calling them liars at all - I personally believe the documentary is 100% truthful. But, we're going to be stuck in this "take their word for it" game until someone comes forth and gives the masses a new "authoritative" viewpoint from first-hand exposure, or the details of their crimes come out in court, and that is released to the public. Don't shoot me, I'm just stating fact. Q has told us, over and over, we have more than we know; we do. We also have a somewhat guided interpretation of what we are to think about what we've seen. That interpretation is obviously being guided by people with access to the Oval Office, and other high-reaches of US Mil Int. When the round ups do happen, maybe the evidence for the claims of this movement of sick pedos, criminals, and satanic rituals will come out in court proceedings. If they don't, people will just have to go on believing what they think they know of.

>Adjusts target on back

Fire away, anons. I'm here because this is the only place to find any real truth anymore, and as of this morning, we're learning we might only have until November to share this particular space together.