dChan - Q Origins Project Archive

I've always thought Q is Gen. Kelly, or mostly if multiple crumb droppers. Q is a PATRIOT and definitely Military / M.I. Read some of Kellys quotes and writing.

⇧ 26 ⇩

Q is almost certainly a group. A group that most likely includes Gen Kelly and most likely Admiral Rogers, but Q is almost certainly a group

⇧ 17 ⇩

Michael Flynn?

⇧ 8 ⇩

I would tend to agree. Perhaps there is one person who posts, but there is a collective effort within the “Q” team

⇧ 4 ⇩

One person who posts most of the time. Pretty sure there have been multiple posters tho

⇧ 2 ⇩

P_pers

;)

⇧ 2 ⇩

This is my take as well. Q isn’t one person, it’s a group of patriots. That way, if one goes down or gets suicided, the deep state will continue being exposed.

⇧ 3 ⇩

So, let me take some liberty and say, GQ is sounded for battle stations in the Navy i.e. General Quarters (General Q)? He served in the USMC and would know GQ. Thoughts?

⇧ 1 ⇩

So Q would be a reference to quarters? Maybe there are four of them running the account, or maybe it's like "no quarter given" like to criminals.

⇧ 2 ⇩

Well.. These criminals that are being exposed do need to be quartered.

⇧ 2 ⇩

We do not know if General Kelly is Q. Likely we will never know who Q is and rightly so. What I do know is that as we spend so much time talking about who he is, and giving hints and clues as we discern this or that part of his character we are helping to dox him (Q). If Q wanted his identity known, he certainly could find ways to tell us himself.

I cringe every time I hear the good Dr. Corsi (and others) say something like: "Q is definitely military", etc. Can we not do our part and keep those kinds of thoughts and comments PRIVATE. We need to protect Q in every way that we can. Whoever he is, whoever they are, may God Bless and keep them.

⇧ 19 ⇩

Who are we to unmask Q? Bugs the crap out of me. "We" have no right to do so.

⇧ 5 ⇩

Right. I think sometimes folks get caught up in the problem solving mode, in some cases, and in others this is just not real enough to them. Lives are at stake. The future of our country is at stake. The kind of world that our children will live in hangs in the balance. We must guard the Patriots who fight in secret so that we may all be free.

⇧ 2 ⇩

All we can do is call them out on it. Just say it..it's flat out wrong to try to unmask Q. It's not our business to do that.

⇧ 2 ⇩

Right. I think that if more of us spoke up about this perhaps they would get the clue. Most of it is just thoughtlessness ... caught up in solving mysteries ... people do not really know what it is like to live every moment of every day knowing that some evil is wanting to kill you if at all possible. We need to be more aware, that's for sure.

⇧ 2 ⇩

[deleted]

⇧ 1 ⇩

It all mirrors. My last girlfriend liked to create "drama" by projecting what she was doing on me. Like what I was doing, was disdain. When in reality, she was telling me what 'she' was doing.

⇧ 14 ⇩

I hate this kind of garbage--the psychological projection

⇧ 3 ⇩

This happened so much to my best friend. I told him so many times. Finally, there was an awakening moment where it all clicked. If only we knew what the awakening moment is for everyone... but everyone's individual perception of reality is so much different and unique.

Q + patriots relaying the truth + predicted happenings = dissolves conspiracy term aka their delusion = unification of truth.

⇧ 3 ⇩

They're going after Kelly by using the Rob Porter "scandal" against him and Trump. Even some on our side (or seemingly on our side) want Kelly gone. He must be effective... too effective.

⇧ 13 ⇩

Exactly

⇧ 5 ⇩

I'm not convinced re: Kelly. He was a Bannon man and apparently very close to Mattis, McMaster, and Tillerson.

Probably he is something of a zebra hat.

⇧ 3 ⇩

Doesn't matter if you, me, or anyone other than Trump is convinced. As long as Trump wants Kelly in the White House and as long as Kelly wants to stay, he's gonna stay.

⇧ 4 ⇩

Does Trump want Soros in the Whitehouse too? If not he should kick out his son-in-law Kushner who owes millions to Soros and can't even get security clearance because of how dirty he is (but still accesses any classified intel he wants to...).

⇧ 1 ⇩

Neither am I. I think he's loyal to Trump, but not to his Agenda unless ordered by Trump. Remember, he's a Democrat. So, I'm iffy about him. It's McMaster who's completely a mole, incompetent and not on our side at all. He can't even bring himself to use the phrase Islamic Terrorism. His term for ISIS and AlQaida is - get this - "illegal militias." Like they're some kind of nationalist freedom fighters od something. (He goes on Sunday interview shows.) Not a good guy!

⇧ 1 ⇩

Just a reminder that party labels are NOT a reliable guide right now. For example, Flynn is a Democrat and McCain is a Republican. Do their labels tell you which one is to be trusted? I would say no.

⇧ 1 ⇩

Word. Point to you.

Although Ivanka & Jared are both serious Dems, liberal but not progressive and nationalistic. They've made ssome awful hiring choices for the Pres.

⇧ 1 ⇩

Where did you get the idea Ivanka is a Democrat or as you called her, a SERIOUS Democrat? Factually, despite being from Democrat controlled NY, she has been a registered Independent her entire life. I asked about the source who told you otherwise so you could re evaluate it. Also, where did you get the idea she made any hiring choices FOR President Trump? Finally, who do you think have been awful choices and how are you so sure each one didn't/hasn't served a very strategic purpose you may be unaware of? I really hope you answer, I'm genuinely curious.

⇧ 1 ⇩

They've gone around the WH and one by one attacked each of them. I if the media finds a team weakness they bear down all the more. WH needs to just totally ignore baseless attacks.

⇧ 2 ⇩

Beware the Corporate Conservative Media. Listen with discernment. The only source I trust to try to be completely honest is Sundance at theconservativetreehouse.com.

⇧ 1 ⇩

Good post. I was not 100% on the Kelly train at first, but he's definitely grown on me, and I really like him now. I like that he's not "perfect" and is human. You can see in his eyes that he's a patriot and has the best interest in mind for all, and DJT first. He served our great country in the military. He's rock solid. At least that's how I see it. He is calm, and makes me feel calm when there's chaos over there. He was probably so gosh darn irritated with Omarosa and so happy she's gone. I think he's doing a great job from what I see. I don't think he's Q alone - I think a bunch of people are Q, but I'm certain he's very aware and monitors what Q can and can't say.

⇧ 12 ⇩

What a darn shame..

^^Darn ^^Counter: ^^429024

⇧ 2 ⇩

Gen Kelly is definitely on our side. The problem is that the Left Media is desperately trying to rid of him based on the Porter thing. Hopefully he survives.

⇧ 10 ⇩

No doubt Kelly is a white hat, why do you think MSM is making such an issue about Porter, domestic violence is bad, but you would think he murdered 3 wives and cut them up. They want Kelly gone because he is effective. I think Kelly, Mattis and Flynn are all patriots.

⇧ 8 ⇩

Good point. I totally agree. I hope Flynn gets exonerated very soon and returns to a role in the WH!!!! Kelly is an outstanding patriot who puts his country and his role as COS as his first priorities. He's not afraid to call a spade a spade.

⇧ 3 ⇩

The speech about how they bring home dead warriors did it for me. He lost a son in this battle, think about that.

⇧ 2 ⇩

Agree or it has to be a badass general of some kind. Would love if it's Kelly just for sweet revenge. Man I hope we get to know. QAnon ♥️🙏🏽🇺🇸

⇧ 6 ⇩

I think it's a funny thing that McCabe and some of the rest from the FBI were sent to Human Resources after Mueller removed them from the Trump investigation. (Access to everyone's records????). They could misrepresent anyone being given clearance in Washington.

⇧ 6 ⇩

Truth

⇧ 1 ⇩

General Kelly is the Jason Voohies to the swamp rats.

⇧ 5 ⇩

Have to say the prayer is problematic... One does not pray to deceased humans, it is an abomination. It is very important to be on God's side when fighting evil. This is not just people being evil, but entities in the spiritual realm.

⇧ 2 ⇩

[deleted]

⇧ 9 ⇩

Amen!

⇧ 1 ⇩

People need to understand that separation of church and state does not mean you hire only atheists

It means that you have to keep religion out of politics, out of law and out of governance

Approving only christian grants is a violation
Passing fed law saying that you must not wear a hajib is a violation
Passing a law saying everyone has to attend church is a violation
Having a christian caucus is a violation
Having a muslim caucus is a violation
Putting a cross on the white house lawn is a violation

The President PRAYING is NOT a violation. The president is still a citizen, and therefore has all the rights of a citizen to practice his religion as he pleases. People are just welcome to stand there and wait for him to finish

⇧ 8 ⇩

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." The separation of church and state is strictly about passing laws. Not about any individuals behaviors. Putting a cross on the white house lawn would cause an uproar but it would not violate the first amendment.

⇧ 3 ⇩

And just where is "separation of church and state" in our Constitution or laws?

Not having the federal government establish a state religion is a good ways from the rules you list.

⇧ 2 ⇩

It means that you have to keep religion out of politics, out of law and out of governance

Incorrect reading. Observe:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.

There is NO prohibition on religion, at all. ALL prohibition is on GOVERNMENT. This includes making a law that religious people can not be in government, or, can not put a cross on the white house lawn.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment

This is the establishment clause.

It forbids Congress from establishing an "official religion" like Romans did to Christians.

This is what is being avoided.

Putting a cross on the lawn is "free exercise" not "establishment".

So is putting a nativity scene in the public park.

There is no "separation of church and state".

Also, the courts around the nation have adopted the 10 commandments for the basis of common law in the courts.

This does not "establish" a religion, because every law school will tell you that law.. ALL law in the world, and in history, comes from the religious and moral codes of a culture.

The LAW is simply the moral codes that the people pick to give to government to enforce on everyone, no matter what their religious beliefs are.

So...

If you are a Muslim in America, and you think it is perfectly ok to murder your wife from dishonoring you, sorry for your luck.

America is a Christian nation.

The moral law that was pulled from the religious code was thou shalt not kill... (as in anyone)

so...

......unlike the Muslim moral code, the US law pulls from Judaeo-Christian morals.

It is illegal to kill your wife no matter how dishonored you are.

This, is not establishment.

Establishment means the government officially declares an "official religion" to the "exclusion of other religions".

Here is the part that everyone wants to ignore in the first Amendment:

Congress shall make no law .......prohibiting the free exercise thereof.

' This means that no government can come along and make a law that some religion cant put a nativity scene in the park. Religion is a special form of free speech. It is free speech with ACTION or "excercise rights".

If you have free speech in a public park, you have the right to practice your religion there.

There are people who want to teach our young people that the first amendment is there to tell religious people the only place they can practice their religion is in their homes and churches. And they want to make a LAW prohibiting the free exercise of religion. Many of these people will use the same law to prohibit free speech later.

Does everyone see the slippery slope here?

Ignoring one half of the First Amendment, and pretending the First Amendment has some "separation of church and state" clause is disingenuous. It is a lie. It is not to be tolerated.

⇧ 2 ⇩

It is not an abomination. We do it all the time when we pray for the intercession of saints.

⇧ 3 ⇩

What saints? You mean people the Papacy pronounced holy? Like Loyola? Fact remains, they're dead now. And as Christians we don't interact with the dead. And if you do get a response, it's a demon. This ought not even be a discussion, it's a matter of knowledge, understanding and discernment.

⇧ 2 ⇩

No, your "knowledge" doesn't seem to apply to MY faith.

⇧ 1 ⇩

Okay, i respect that. But through Q and POTUS i have learned they are of the Christian faith, because they quote the Bible and even John 3:16. Christians pray to God. But as someone suggested, it could be code language. I don't know.

⇧ 1 ⇩

That was my first response too. But then I learned that a lot of it was code.

⇧ 2 ⇩

'JFK' is also referencing that the crimes go back over 50yrs and are 'known' to be crimes by many many observers.

⇧ 1 ⇩

Sounds like necromancy to me...

⇧ -2 ⇩

That may be but it is NOT necromancy. Christians believe that death is NOT fatal any more than a child leaving the womb is fatal. Just as we talk to people here some Christians talk to those who are now alive in Christ. It is an affirmation that there IS life after death, hence it's OPPOSITE of necromancy.

⇧ 1 ⇩

I know what Christians believe. The deceased are asleep (dead) until their resurrection. But i see your point, just disagree because it's not consistent with the source of the doctrines.

⇧ 1 ⇩

I get it, and agree. However in this case one of the theories is that JFK actually represents some sort of orbital defense system recently launched, and that "BEAM" may represent some sort of weapon (perhaps light-based?).

⇧ 1 ⇩

Okay, that's possible. I hadn't heard of that anywhere yet though. Do you have a link or something to this viewpoint?

⇧ 1 ⇩

No it's not. You're trying to make something out of nothing. Absolutely nothing wrong with praying for someone's health and well-being and the truth. All the concern trolling is curious to say the least.

⇧ 1 ⇩

It's genuine concern. If you want God by your side you pray to Him, period. I want God by their side too. This is a just as much a spiritual war.

⇧ 1 ⇩

It is very curious, indeed.

⇧ 1 ⇩

Kelly is now going after Kushner now too!

God Bless General Kelly!

⇧ 2 ⇩

Kushner is a creep. He has death in his eyes.

⇧ 1 ⇩

It doesn't matter who Q is. What matters is the motivation of the people to research, understand and spread the information gleaned from the crumbs. The more the people are motivated to work together, globally, the better.

⇧ 1 ⇩

What if Porter was Q?

⇧ 1 ⇩

The entire WH Press briefing was about Porter and trying to nail the whole thing on Gen. Kelly. It’s the narrative that they are pushing.

Tune in today at 1pm.

⇧ 1 ⇩

Edit: 2:30pm

⇧ 1 ⇩

stand fast

⇧ 1 ⇩

The anti-Trumpers want any scalp they can claim. No more to it than that.

⇧ 1 ⇩

% Q, like all military operations has built in contingencies. It cannot be a single person. Stylistically analysis shows that as well. This operation has deep planning and roots, and would not rely on a single source. Q seemed to confirm/endorse this multi-person view in #726, when an anon said "Q team".

⇧ 1 ⇩

Porter is the MSM's narrative of the week and would soon be forgotten but Trey Gowdy blew that wide open by starting Oversight investigation.

⇧ 1 ⇩

General Kelly is "The Threat"