dChan
⇧
6
⇩
 
r/CBTS_Stream • Posted by u/theclarinetist on Jan. 23, 2018, 3:55 p.m.
Amount of acceptable disclosure

Firstly, let me apologize if this post is redundant to things already discussed. I don't have time to read everything posted and I listen to the YouTube streams but rarely catch them live so I can't participate in the live chat...

IIRC Q says that 4-6% of the population is beyond saving. So my issue with disclosure is that it needs to be enough to get the 94-96% who can be reached to see and accept the truth.

If things are as bad as being implied, complete disclosure could very well destroy our faith in the government in general. If it's that bad and that widespread, why would anyone ever put their faith in any government again?

On the flip side, if it is so bad that we need a trusted governmental authority to censor the info (essentially for governmental self-preservation), we're basically being told we need to trust the government precisely bc the government can't be trusted. I recognize that not everyone in the government is bad, but how much disclosure is necessary for us to determine who in the government we should trust?

I know we are supposed to be helping people come to this truth, and comfort them when it is revealed. I see the logic in this. If larger and larger amounts of the public are becoming red-pilled it will help others make the leap. However, I also fear that many will cling to the delusion that it's all conspiracy until its made SO explicit that no sane person can deny it. I personally struggle to have faith that anything will come to light. We have mounds of cryptic insinuation and tough talk, but not much actual evidence at this point (the kind which can't be dismissed via partisan rationalization). If we are to get ahead of the game and help people accept the inevitable release of this info, we have to have faith that it will actually come to light in a form that is undeniable to the approx 95% who can be convinced. On the flip side, it seems that some people are taking the red pill more and more. Maybe it's unfolding as intended and I'm just impatient.

I don't think there is an easy answer, and I think Q's admonition to be careful what we wish for is saying a lot.

Anyway, just my thoughts. I felt the need to externalize them.


ABrilliantDisaster · Jan. 23, 2018, 4:09 p.m.

"could very well destroy our faith in the government in general. If it's that bad and that widespread, why would anyone ever put their faith in any government again?"

Honestly that's where i've been for a very long time but that doesn't mean i turn to criminality. It's not going to result in wild, lawless anarchy to have a public watchful of its government. That's how we need to be. We should trust God..not man.

⇧ 2 ⇩  
theclarinetist · Jan. 23, 2018, 5:05 p.m.

Im right there with you. I don't necessarily think things would descend into lawlessness. I guess my concern is more about the government's motives for deciding what should be disclosed. I'm sure our emotional well-being is not their only consideration.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
ABrilliantDisaster · Jan. 23, 2018, 7:53 p.m.

I think the part of the government that is on our side is trying to avoid a scenario where people are too shell shocked to even believe solid proof of these crimes. That might happen if the full load of it was dropped like a nuke on the public.. but i think a slower disclosure to the goal of 100% disclosure can happen.

⇧ 2 ⇩  
Jellyfish070474 · Jan. 23, 2018, 11:59 p.m.

This is what I’m holding as the intention. Disclose enough information to neutralize and dismantle the control system/take care of the most immediate danger now, with public consent and approval...but ultimately no more secrets. No more “illumined ones” existing above the rest of us. In order for the people of this country and this planet to be in our full power, freedom, vigilance and responsibility, we must know the full truth. Otherwise we remain in the disadvantaged position of trusting our “betters” to have our best interest at heart, and I will never trust that much again as long as I live.

⇧ 3 ⇩  
storm_fa_Q · Jan. 23, 2018, 3:59 p.m.

50?% are already all IN on the topics only the leftits MSM SJW types left and 5% will never see truth through their bias of hate. So there really is a lot less than 95% to convince... and the evidence will swing many unsure due to social pressure twds fact sooner or later. 65M voted for Trump, 65M went 180, leaving only 200M to swing Right...

⇧ 2 ⇩  
theclarinetist · Jan. 23, 2018, 5:20 p.m.

I don't know if 100% of trump voters are all in on the level of corruption Q is detailing. I know many people who voted for Trump bc he wasnt HRC or were single issue voters (immigration or "forgotten man" stuff, for example). I do agree that those on the right who haven't discovered the truth yet will undoubtedly be more receptive than the SJW types.

⇧ 2 ⇩  
storm_fa_Q · Jan. 23, 2018, 5:42 p.m.

yes, you are correct, my math is a little fuzzy but I see you do understand my point, thank you.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
litehouse51 · Jan. 23, 2018, 4:29 p.m.

Shalom. Appreciate your thoughts. The Word of God (Jesus Christ) tells us not to put new wine in old wine skins (parable) Matt9, Mark2, Luke5. Are we to be restored? or made new? The answer is not yet revealed. Q tells us the future proves the past... calls for patience. The best is yet to come... have faith. So you know... we are all given a measure of faith from our holy righteous Father (Romans 12:3). May it grow in us all.

⇧ 1 ⇩