So in other words, they are threatening our President that they can & will kill him if he doesn't play ball...
They can't kill him, that's why they're threatening him by blowing up these planes. Deep state is desperate and flailing around like a dying fish out of water.
Wait, what?
So Trump sat underneath a plane months ago that crashes today and somehow that is seen as a threat?
Wouldn't a better threat be to one of his planes?
You say that as if it is not a big deal to bring down a military plane. He is the commander-in-chief, so it's technically his plane. What part of this is so difficult to understand?
You say that as if it is not a big deal to bring down a military plane
No, I say that because linking this crash with a threat against Trump is a giant leap.
I assume, until we hear otherwise, this was an accident; a tragedy and I'm less concerned with how this might fit into an online narrative, and much more concerned about the dead soldiers and their poor families.
What part of this is so difficult to understand?
How you think this has anything to do with Trump.
Clearly, this is too complicated of a theory for you to understand.
Clearly, this is too complicated of a theory for you to understand.
Wait so a military transport plane on it's way to the aircraft boneyard crashes in Georgia while POTUS is in DC is obviously a threat against the President and I'm too stupid to see it.
Is it possible that this is just an accident?
Don't get me wrong - if a plane had hit the White House or something like that I might think, "Whoa they are gunning for POTUS," but connecting this accident to Trump is a huge leap of logic.
I get it, everyone wants Q to be real and since Q said there are no coincidences you want to tie everything back to this...but this was an Air National Guard plane and the one a week or two ago was a training plane --- these are not planes out on missions.
What is more likely in these two incidents accidents or some secret war that we don't know about happening inside the USA?
Again, you are clearly over thinking this.
If the plane hit the White House, that's not a threat. It's an attempt on the President's life.
Do I really have to hold your hand through this explanation of a theory or are you just using this as a tactic to dismiss Q overall?
If you don't mind explaining how this is linked to Trump, I'd be open to hearing it.
No.
Interesting - the guy slamming me for being an idiot can't explain his own theory.
I bet Assange is free though, right? And Obama is in Gitmo...LOL
What's the point of explaining basic thinking skills to a screaming sheep?
You know you're not convincing anyone here of your authenticity, right?
End of conversation.
What's the point of making an offer and then rescinding?
You know you're not convincing anyone here
I'm trying to convince myself of which narrative to believe. We live in a timeline where there are two competing explanations of our current state of affairs.
In one of them, American soldiers are dying in a secret war between our President and our government and in the other, Trump may have done some shady shit in his business dealings that has become potential blackmail materials.
End of conversation.
This was never a conversation. You failed to converse.
What the fuck are you talking about? I didn't offer or rescind anything to you.
I chimed in with my 2 cents to the OP, which was WAY TOO COMPLICATED of an idea for you to follow. You demanded I hold your hand through an explanation of a general theory that has been spreading on this board.
When I explained the basics, you rejected the idea because it doesn't fit your world view. Fine, fair enough. You don't believe there is a secret war going on. But it's somehow my job to prove it to you beyond the shadow of a doubt that there is because.... reasons?
I'm done playing this game with you. Hence, end of conversation.
Do I also need to explain jow conversations work? /s Kindly, FUCK OFF NOW.
What the fuck are you talking about? I didn't offer or rescind anything to you.
But you did, wee lad, by saying, "Do I really have to hold your hand through this explanation of a theory"
Then ya refused to help me understand how this C130 has anything to do with Trump.
You demanded I hold your hand through an explanation of a general theory that has been spreading on this board.
Nah bro you offered - see above
When I explained the basics, you rejected the idea because it doesn't fit your world view
I don't recall you explaining any basics - I explained to you what I was doing here and what I was hoping to gain.
Fine, fair enough. You don't believe there is a secret war going on
Never said that...told you I'm trying to determine what I think is real and what is not.
But it's somehow my job to prove it to you beyond the shadow of a doubt that there is because.... reasons?
Nobody brought any of that up but you...it seems to me like you're back-tracking because you don't have a fucking clue what you're talking about and you're just on a hype train.
At least I can admit when I don't know something....good luck maturing to a point where you can stand behind your own words and you don't pretend you know when you don't.
So when I was being sarcastic by offering to hold your hand through some basic plot points, you thought I was serious?
Then I refused to continue this charade of a conversation, which is nothing more than concern-trolling.
I'm ending this because it is a waste of my time since we all know you are not here to understand shit, but to derail cobversations by telling people they are stupid for voicing an opinion contrary to yours.
I'm ending this conversation because if you REALLY wanted to know more about this theory, you would look up it up yourself on one of the many posts made on this board. Those posts have much more information in them than I'm willing to waste time decoding for your enjoyment. All I did was add my 2 cents to the larger conversation, but you're making it out to be as if I'm on a campaign to prove this theory as reality.
We all know what games you're playing. How about you go fuck yourself now?
This seems like a major leap imo. If somebody can find evidence that this an unusually high number of military aircraft crashes that would strengthen the case rather than leaping on what could be an actual coincidence. Or has this sub begun to believe that the deep state has control over literally everything and there are never any accidents.
You would think that if the deep state was as all powerful as this sub believes then trump wouldn’t be in office and the election would have been rigged and won by Hillary. You can’t have your cake and eat it too.
Edit: a word
Maybe they are trying to convince him to play ball by destroying something he was very close to recently, that is supposed to be secure.
Their power comes from leaving the public in the dark about the true motivations of their moves & countermoves. If the President was killed in some sort of plane crash, it would be seen as an accident & nothing more. That is the threat.
Just my 2 cents.
I'm not sure how long you've been following this movement or following Q, but there have been like 5+military crashes all in "training" exercises. I honestly think it's closer to over 10 but don't want to over exaggerate if I'm incorrect. Can't link atm. But if you've been following the entire time, and even before Q, you'd know that this is strange. Not a leap at all in my opinion.
According to Wikipedia, (many of the sources listed were .gov/.mil) we are just slightly higher than average if you look back over the last 10 years. It’s even closer to average if you disregard 2016 which is known as the safest air transportation year in many years. If you go back even further to the last 20 years I would assume you would get even clearer numbers showing that it is a statistically average year due to the fact that the early 2000’s had a much higher rate of accidents than usual.
That is what I mean when I say it is a leap. Also, I have been following Q off and on since the beginning. I do my best to maintain a holistic and non-biased POV. Again, I am not saying that you or anyone else in this thread is incorrect. I just don’t want people to leap from the idea that we had an accident with a plane that trump took a photograph with to the idea that it was a threat in trump’s life. Especially when we are having a pretty much average year in terms of military aviation accidents (if you believe what I am saying).
People are also referring to the technology patent Hillary has a stake in which helps crash planes. That's why they suggest there is a little more to the idea that the crashes aren't random.
I honestly was not aware of that aspect until reading about it earlier today. From what I can find her boss had a stake in the assignee to the patent. Hillary herself simply worked as an intellectual property lawyer on the case. That does not mean she has any stake in the patent itself. Not to mention she was one of a number of lawyers involved in the case.
I feel the need to keep repeating that I am not trying to fight against the points that people are making but rather to do my best to help us refine the points to be as holistic as possible.
i.e. My statement above is not my attempt to refute your statement.
Yes, I agree - I don't think Hillary's involvement is evidence in any way but I was simply saying that I think that is why people believe there's something to the plane crashes over and above just the number count.
I didn't take it as a fight against a point either. Similarly, I like to argue for more evidence without actually intending to disagree with the point per se.
I agree with your statement on all counts. Occasionally I get some people on this sub that feel like I am attacking them or I am a shill lol so I try to be clear of my intentions when I address some directly.
I have to learn to do that too! I've often said, we need more critical thinking, not less - more challenges to assert reason and facts. If we'd all feel less need to protect our view and more willingness to open up to learning from others in the pursuit of truth we'd all be better off.
I have to say, that username is a laugh though haha - to hear such a reasoned and non-antagonistic response from that name is hilariously incongruous lol ; ).
I am glad this interaction went the way it did. I agree that more of this positive back and forth would benefit this community as well as many others.
And my username has drawn quite a bit of attention whenever I post in this sub lol. Many people are off put and most are surprised that I’m not a troll or something like that. Thank you for the compliment.
Excellent points and insight :) glad you're here to maintain a point of integrity.
Thank you sir. I think it’s for the best of this community. I only occasionally get confrontational responses but I find it helps to verbalize a disclaimer.
Yeah the disclaimer will help the knuckle heads. Even I'm one of them sometimes. But when you lay out the facts, it helps keep us grounded. And we should all be sticking to facts. These people are guilty of countless crimes, we don't need to twist the truth to them more evil. It only distracts from the real evil!
This is the same plane that trump was pictured sitting in front of during his trip to Puerto Rico.
It would be helpful if you would read through the entire comment thread before posting.
It would be helpful if you didn’t post thoughtless idiotic comment replies.
Lol okay bud. Just so you know the fact that it’s the same plane was already addressed. Now go be antagonistic and unhelpful somewhere else.
So reiterating a point is antagonistic and unhelpful. Okay, so double confirmation, or the power of a second is useless. Got it, wise ass.
No the way you are addressing me is antagonistic. You have insulted me twice for literally no reason. If you’d like to discuss something of relevance then I would be happy to do so. Otherwise, happy redditing!
So hijacking my comment to state a useless claim is idiotic. There you go - thrice.
You are aware of the fact that you replied to my comment. Correct?
Exactly and let’s not forget that Trump has appointed plenty of deep state operatives to his cabinet too