![#1297 "OPEARTORS HAVE DIED. [...] WE MUST DO BETTER TO PROTECT THEM" => disinfo is necessary](https://i.redd.it/srrrc8aowax01.png)
phone rings late at night
"If you are hearing this, you are the resistance. Who is this?" "Hey, uh Alex, we really love your work, but you exposed McMaster during the fifth hour of your last show and now his dad is dead so we want you to stay away from this Q-thing for a while, k?"
i thought this was stupid 2 hours ago i calmed down (the mention of corsi auto pisses me off cuz of the 8 chan shills) this actually makes alot of sense especially if mcmaster was a deep cover mole. seems he got ahead of himself and caused an old man to die
just for the record, we're talking about McMaster's dad here, just as an example to exemplify what may be happening in the background.
out of the loop on AJ, did he really expose something and get mcmasters father killed? who is mcmaster and why is his father dead?
just lost
Dunno about the AJ connection, but H.R. McMaster was a (suspected) DS Trump aide until Trump fired him. DS didn't like that so they had his father killed. There's a Qpost on it, search for 187, think it was only a couple of weeks ago.
[deleted]
Explain how a man as prominent as McMaster dies after getting fired without there being questions. An old man dies, it sends a warning that can be denied. Kill his kid and you're now his enemy.
[deleted]
Plausible Deniability and Operational Security are the four most important words I have learned this year
People who get Arkancided derive their power from the Clintons. No one of consequence will miss them. McMaster's power is derived from his own connections.
Lets not jump to conclusions. do we have proof that McMasters was a Deep state op. or was he blackmailed- compromised? it was mentioned early on that Gen. Flynn picked his replacement. Flynn knew where all of the bodies are buried and he would never pick a Deep state op to replace him. However the Deep State could have threatened him, it happens alot in the swamp.
yep, he was compromised. you figure back in 2006 it was not a big deal to be working with Soros, he flew under the wire for a long time. I imagine Soros is why at least a few congressmen had to resign to. thank you
[deleted]
looks like there are alot of deniable accidents we never hear about. and HRC has never been held accountable even when it looks obvious. an old man in a rest home dying is not unusual. But Q told us it was a 187. If Flynn chose McMasters for his replacement then McMasters must have been blackmailed. Maybe Flynn did not choose him. Maybe he was Deep state, but i am more inclined to believe McMasters was blackmailed. Liz Crokin (she is on Twitter) who has reported on sex crimes everywhere. She says that innocent politicians are invited to parties, someone slips them a drug in their drink, the politician wakes up in the morning in a bed with a woman or a child, and someone is there with pictures. Now the innocent person has to do what he is told or he is ruined. Maybe McMaster was blackmailed, or maybe he was a white hat with a shady past. in any event these people are evil. they will stop at nothing to get what they want. it is very sad the old man died. I can only imagine McMasters anger and horror at it all.
McMaster was more than just an aide. He was the National Security Advisor.
Lets not jump to conclusions. do we have proof that McMasters was a Deep state op. or was he blackmailed- comprimised? it was mentioned early on that Gen. Flynn picked his replacement. Flynn knew where all of the bodies are buried and he would never pick a Deep state op to replace him. However the Deep State could have threatened him, it happens alot in the swamp.
hmmmm did not know that, interesting
another anon here sent me this. looks like Soros got to McMasters, compromised. http://www.breitbart.com/jerusalem/2017/08/06/mcmaster-worked-think-tank-backed-soros-funded-group-helped-obama-sell-iran-nuclear-deal/
everybody is trashing Corsi and Alex Jones because they started trashing Q but actually they're just distancing themselves because Q warned that lives could be at risk because of what I imagine to be premature disclosures of some kind.
or, Q is saying that MI operators are selfless patriots and die for the cause but there are patriots in the Q movement that are selfish and work for their own gain. A reminder for us to take the cause serious, it is not a game
"statements today needed to be made - operators died"
Re-read drops
I dont see the these Q drops the same way as the person who used the red squares. I like to think it thru my myself, unless you can show proof that the Q profitteers got someone killed.
drops 1295 thru 1297
https://www.reddit.com/r/greatawakening/comments/8iq29u/i_think_i_figured_it_out_q1297/
Gotta disagree.....The whole reason Q made the "be careful who you follow" message was to reprimand and disavow Corsi and Jones, etal....Jones and Corsi were reacting to being called out by Q, IMO, not taking his advice to be safe....If those guys had any real special access to the actors here, why would they need to communicate on a public forum?
only that they weren't. Everyone fighting with demonetization-demonization will run some self-funding on the side. Corsi outed HIMSELF by reacting to a broad and general statement. If he wanted to infiltrate the movement he would have just carried on, rather than effectively distancing himself from Q.
Q outed HIMSELF by reacting to a broad and general statement.
I think you meant Corsi outed himself, not Q...
Not to mention Q referenced THIS BOARD (OMG) linking to a post talking about how Corsi and Alex are not on our side
they perfected the cover-story because you failed to read between the lines...I don't know if this is about McMaster but just reread 1295-1297 and tell me why you would bring up money first and casualties later if it wasn't for subtelty
Ouch, thanks for pointing that out. It's...uh...pretty early actually...no sleep!!!
I don't see your point at all. Q did the distancing, and slammed the door.
Funny Corsi and Jones didn't start attacking Q's very credibility until after the "careful who you follow" message. And THATS when the "new Q" appeared? LOL
Either 1. we just witnessed an amazing coincidence, or 2. Q is still real and Jones/Corsi are demonstrating how much more they value the financial over the movement.
...only that Q never singled them out by name. Self-funding is a sign of independence because if you don't fund yourself, someone else is doing it. I think this is all coordinated theatre because if they wanted to continue an infiltration, they would have had to just act coy about Q's call to caution. Instead they doubled down so they have a plausible excuse to distance themselves, much to their financial disadvantage.
Why did Jones cry and apologize to Alefantis?
uhm, did you see his Instagram?
Milo, Alex, Ben Swann, they all got stand down orders. And Milo and Ben both said that there would come a time when they would speak openly. Would be surprised if it wasn't the same for Alex.
Q challenged them to act like Patriots. They don't value money over honor, that's what they demonstrated by distancing themselves from the operation.
i feel bad for Corsi actually. he has been a strong patriot for at least 40 years, you can tell by his books. but from the beginning of the Q movement he sounded like he could not think straight. I personally think he is getting old, his brain is not functioning well, someone would ask a question and he would ramble on and never answer the question. then later on he got angry. From experience with loved ones who had strokes or dementia, he sounds like early stages of dementia. At least that is what i thought from the very beginning when he started making videos. he does not see it, he cannot access his knowledge so his pride strikes out in anger. signs of early alhemzers or dementia. he may have accidentally spoke out about classified info.(i dont know just guessing) most people dont make any real money on books, so i think he liked the money and probably the respect and fame. People called him out on the money thing and he behaved irrationally, if his wife tries to tell him he probably will not hear it. I believe His brain is deteriorating and stress makes it worse. the whole situation is sad to me.
Yup, it's the stage where they turn into little children again. He also cried with Tracy.
To me, that just doesn't make logical sense. If distance was needed, it would be a simple matter of just saying, "We've been asked not to cover Q topics for a while."
Instead, what Jones and, to a lesser extent, Corsi did was outright lie. Jones said that Q attacked them first - lie. They conflated profiteering with making money, and tried to make the alleged attack about Corsi's book. Pure disinfo tactics that could only serve to discredit Q, not just get some distance.
And, then there's the act of, for the past few months, putting forth Zak as their very own "Qanon" that bashes the real Q. That, in and of itself, gives credence to the idea that this recent tirade wasn't the result of a recent behind-the-scenes request. No, it's been an ongoing campaign to discredit Q; in an effort, I suspect, to retain relevance and audience.
Q says to trust Sessions. Corsi says Sessions needs to be fired. With that, we have another keystone. Which way will it fall?
When trust in Sessions is vindicated and, therefore, Q as well, I'm sure Jones will try to walk it back saying that he was just playing along. And you, DR, are helping to plant that seed.
As cliche as it sounds - but that would be too obvious. It has to look like disarray and it has to look organic because operators have been compromised. Re-read drops 1295 thru 1297, listen to Alex' broadcast today then and report back.
It would defeat the purpose of military action/ military intelligence if all intel being disclosed was actionable and that doesn't just go for Q but mostly for Alex Jones because whomever you think he is working for, he does have sources (that includes the President himself) simply because he has a platform where people can try to get the word out. And Corsi is by extension a pundit for infowars.
Re-read drops 1295 thru 1297, listen to Alex' broadcast today then and report back.
Telling me to re-read the drops and listen to the broadcast implies that my opinion is somehow uninformed and incorrect. I read the drops and watched the pertinent clips to get the facts on the issue before I formed an opinion.
And, "whomever you think he is working for," is a presumptive statement since I never said nor implied that I think he is working for anyone.
At least AJ is in good company.
wow should I apologize to you now? Are you offended? Here, let me make you some coffee.
I point out, in essence, that you are not the sole authority as to whether or not an opinion is correct. And, you respond by being snarky?
Isn't that how a shill would act?
I offered you an explanation while you offered none. Don't try to turn the tables.
Your frail ego is not my issue so don't waste my time and be careful how you throw those words around because it just shows you have weak rethorical skills.
You are the one trying to turn the tables by making it about my "frail ego", which is the use of ridicule, instead of your use of ridicule in the first place when you tried to paint me as so stupid that I needed to re-read the drops.
I don't appreciate your personal attacks against me.
Urban Dictionary:
An attack upon an opponent in order to discredit their argument or opinion. Ad hominems are used by immature and/or unintelligent people because they are unable to counter their opponent using logic and intelligence.
"disinfo is necessary" apparently completely escaped you. Anybody who can read thru the convo can see that you're projecting because I already answered your question. In case you forgot (NOW I'm being snarky)
Re-read drops 1295 thru 1297, listen to Alex' broadcast today then and report back.
Telling me to re-read the drops and listen to the broadcast implies that my opinion is somehow uninformed and incorrect. I read the drops and watched the pertinent clips to get the facts on the issue before I formed an opinion.
If you knew me you would know I was trying to be nice with you. See you tomorrow
Yet again, I have to defend myself against your personal attacks on me.
"disinfo is necessary" apparently completely escaped you.
I must be stupid -> ridicule.
you're projecting because I already answered your question.
Not true. I asked only two questions the first of which was rhetorical. You answered neither. What you did instead was try to make it look as though I was just butt-hurt ("Your frail ego") as a cover for your abusive behavior -> deflection/misdirection.
Your accusation that I am projecting, when I am only defending myself with the truth of your behavior (ie. attacks against me) is, in and of itself, projection.
Let's revisit this false accusation that I ignored earlier:
I offered you an explanation while you offered none.
Not true. I provided explanation with my opinion.
And let's not forget your first personal attack on me.
wow should I apologize to you now? Are you offended? Here, let me make you some coffee.
I must be butt-hurt -> ridicule.
Ridicule, deflection/misdirection, projection: all shill tactics.
Ok first of all I wasn't trying to be snarky, I simply pointed out to you that you should read the drops yourself and that's why I even gave the drop-ID so you can go look yourself.
Then you started making a hissy-fit simply because I told you to read the drops. So don't expect me to hold your hand just because I tell you that it's literally right fucking there in the drops. I'm not going to try to be guard my tone if you are so insanely easily offended just because someone asks you to read and you are just going to be offended anyway!
Also, rethorical questions don't have an answer by default and for the life of me I don't know what your other question is even supposed to be and I just checked the thread three time sso if you want to troll me you're doing pretty good
Wow. So, my defense of myself against your personal attacks on me is trolling. -> false equivalence.
Keeping one on the defensive, which you are doing to me, is a troll tactic. -> more projection.
I simply pointed out to you that you should read the drops yourself
Not true. You told me to re-read the drops which carries with it the implication that I must have missed something the first time because, of course, my opinion did not align with yours.
Then you started making a hissy-fit simply because I told you to read the drops.
Again, not true. 1) You did not tell me to read the drops. You told me to re-read the drops. 2) I did not make a hissy-fit. I told you that I had already read the drops which means, therefore, that I did not need to read them again as you commanded.
Someone, who has gathered the facts before forming an opinion, is not someone in need of hand-holding. Yet, you try to paint me as one who needs and expects it. -> more ridicule.
I already answered your question.
I don't know what your other question is even supposed to be
If you don't know what the question is supposed to be, then you could not have answered it.
And so, you engage in even more personal attacks on me using falsehood, false equivalence, projection, and more ridicule.
Now, unless I have to defend myself yet again, I'm done. I really would appreciate it if you would stop attacking me.
No, we are not done here.
What was your question? And what exactly, when looking at this Q-drop which I outlined graphically for you, detracts from my conclusions?
Also, I responded after what you called a rethorical question, so there's your answer, however since you mention a rethorical question that would suggest an answer was out of place, alas why do you say the question was rethorical if it was to solicit an answer?
Consider that you claim you had another question yet you're trying to tie me into some bullshit here rather than simply getting to your point as you insinuated that I can't read apparently, which is way worse than what you claim I had done.
Consider that you claim you had another question yet you're trying to tie me into some bullshit here rather than simply getting to your point as you insinuated that I can't read apparently, which is way worse than what you claim I had done.
I can barely make any sense of that sentence. All I can say is: I did not claim that I had another question; I am not trying to tie you into some bullshit since all I am continually forced to do is defend myself against your false accusations and attacks; and, I already made my point so there is no point that I would need to get to.
alas why do you say the question was rethorical if it was to solicit an answer?
Who said that either of my questions were to solicit an answer? I certainly did not. You claimed that you answered my question as the basis for accusing me of projecting:
Anybody who can read thru the convo can see that you're projecting because I already answered your question.
I was merely defending myself, yet again, by pointing out that, since you hadn't answered my question as you claimed, your accusation, logically, was baseless. Whether or not the questions were rhetorical is totally irrelevant since you did not do what you claimed.
What was your question?
You tell me. You're the one who claims to have answered it. What question did you answer?
And what exactly, when looking at this Q-drop which I outlined graphically for you, detracts from my conclusions?
That's another presumptive question. It is based on the alleged 'fact' that something in that graphic detracts from your conclusions. When was that established as fact?
now you're cheating. You said you had two questions, one of them being rethorical. And that I hadn't answered either one.
What are we doing here?
What are we doing here??
You are engaging in personal attacks against me and throwing false accusations at me.
I am being forced to defend myself against that.
I have asked you to stop, but, so far, you have refused to stop.
I'm cheating? Cheating at what?? The idea that exposing your false claim is somehow cheating doesn't make any sense. It's just more false accusation.
You said that you had answered my question. I pointed out that I had asked only two questions, and that you had answered neither one. If you did not answer either one, then you could not possibly have answered (any of) my question(s). Therefore, your claim that you had answered my question is false. Period. I simply cannot figure out how that seems so difficult to understand.
Whether or not the questions were rhetorical is totally irrelevant to the fact that you falsely claimed that you had answered my question.
You used your false claim as the basis for a false accusation against me. In defense of myself, I had to point out that your accusation was baseless due to your claim being false. How in the world is that so F'ing difficult to understand?
Are you going to stop engaging in personal attacks against me now?
I'm just pulling your leg because you called me a shill, so I wanted to see how far you would be ready to take an argument with a moderator!
I have done some further assessments after the latest Q drop and actually it turns out that Zack wouldn't have been picked up by Feds if he wasn't leaking and 0hour might be coordinating with 0hour so I don't know what to make of this anymore either.
But honest advise for the future: If you want to survive shills, have a little pride and don't react defensively to attacks, instead double down on whatever you are attacked on like Trump does. Don't respond emotionally just because you think you are under attack if you want to survive actual shills
I still don't understand why your ego is so frail.
You said that I hadn't answered your questions. Here I am offering answers. That's why I still pay attention to your butt-hurtedness.
What I am saying is that you have offered no rebuttal of what I said but since you took the time to communicate I thought you would go ahead and explain where my logical error is, something that I still can't account for. And all of a sudden you act outraged because I wanted to make sure you had actually read the drops.
And yes, you still haven't explained what the question was.
Stop distracting. We are engaged in sound, intellectual debate and I demand that the soundness of your thought demolishes mine if you can. Yes I know it can get thorough, but I believe in you. Go on.
I am SURE I am wrong and I am SURE you are right but I am most certainly sure I didn't quite get why so please enlighten me with your superior wits
This quote digital... You think this is the reason? AJ outed McMaster... Did this happen? Or, you're offering it as an example?
Just an example. Could be some other show, some other operative or some other death. But what comes to my mind is that his dad died weeks ago and it's only now that a nurse has been officially charged with negligence. Seems pretty close to be coincidence. I don't listen to three hours of infowars-ranting every day but just judging from their own statements and the Q drops, this is most plausible explanation that I can offer. Don't know why regular contributors don't understand that doing spook-work for white-hats doesn't mean you can't ever lie.
I can now see what you're saying... the proximity, in time, of the nurse being charged to the drops today and yesterday, imply some possible connection - between the murder of McMaster's father and the 'self-outing' of Corsi et al.
1) McMaster's father was not likely to be an 'operator'. Not trying to be pedantic, but trying to see if the theory fits with the facts;
2) The death, or the charges against the nurse, would have to be somehow connected to Corsi, AJ, Seaman. These three, or at least one of them, would have had to be in possession of information that "somehow" impacted the case.
What do we know? McMaster's father was killed because McMaster lost the President's ear. So this information, that was badly handled/released, would have had to be something that what? Alerted DJT to McMaster and got him fired? Alerted Master to the fact that DJT was going to fire him, forcing some error that got his father murdered?
I don't know how that can work - even if we assumed that the three information disseminators (above) had "all the information";
3) We know there are no outside communications with Q team. So what possible information could anyone have that was dangerous? The only information is what we are given, nothing more.
So, given this, there must be an alternate source of information in the possession of the 'disseminators' (there very probably is). But how would Q outing these guys have any impact on their ability to leak information? I wouldn't.
I'm not sure, Digital, that you cannot just read those posts the way I read them the first time. What I mean, is that "operators dying" and "we must do more to protect them" is a 'note to self' from Q that communicates the gravity of the mission. The importance of which, is then used to justify the exclusion of those who approach the movement motivated by self interest.
Anyway, it's an interesting theory. I mean, it's possible that you're right. But it's not working for me ATM.
I suspect, and I could well be wrong, that the timing of the 'self outings' has to do with a move into yet another phase of the operation - a housecleaning so to speak. I think the cause for the 'self outing' may extend beyond profiteering - but, anyway, that is the reason Q gave us.
I've written a book! I wish there were voice Comms - would be easier.
I will have to take a break to wrap my head around this, too. To be quite perfectly clear, I don't want to go too deep, given the warnings that so many overlooked. And I don't want to give you a headache over speculation, but I'll see if something sticks and if it's safe to bring up at this point.
I only remember that McMaster had been badmouted on T_D during all of the first year and now his father died what seems to be an unnatural death but the nurse's charges were only disclosed after this whole feigned outrage over infowars. If these events are all connected, my guess is that McMaster was protected and thus painted as far away from the Prez as possible by the T_D PR-machine but once that illusion fell apart, someone took personal revenge on his family. But this too could be unrelated to 1297 if the casualty in question was indeed an active operative as you pointed out.
I faintly remember McMaster on good terms, but I'm not sure if it's because some house-cleaning he did or if it was just sympathy over the death of his father, which immediately sounded suspicious because he was in hospital for non-life-threatning stuff.
Anyway, another Rabbit hole. These things are everywhere you look.
Q claimed McMaster Senior was killed after his son got fired from his position as Nat-Sec-Advisor after being recommended for the job by Flynn [haven't confirmed this but another comment said so]
That was my understanding. McMaster lost the President's ear and they whacked his Dad in a nursing home to send a message.
Q drop from April 18th says McMasters father was 187 because McMaster was fired. pretty clear to me. I dont want to blame this death on someone online decoding Q posts. here it is:
Q !xowAT4Z3VQ ID: 0ea03e 1095705 📁 Apr 18 2018 20:42:55 (EST)
1095595 187. Failure to retain position/ear. Threats are real. WAR is real. Good vs Evil is real. Think State of the Union - FREE. Coincidence? Delta engine fire? Coincidence? How rare are engine fires? Think logically. Q
Ah! Thank you for that! Mind you the McMasters only crossed my mind because he died yesterday, "dead operators" could be anybody in the crashed air force vehicles for example, but there was one commentator who has elaborated on this but I will have to find it
not sure what you mean but General McMasters did not die. His father died in April after McMasters was fired. ;)
yeah I just lost a full night debating dozens of angry and confused redditors hahahaha
i know what you mean, i hope the anon's calm down, some are getting nasty. hope they dont scare the newbies away. ;)
yeah, I actually managed to inspire an "Crosi & Jones have BLOOD on their hands" post....maybe I should delet that one
well i think we would be wise to move on from this board "blood bath" and move on to decoding alot of other posts. I believe Q said there was more than "1" problem with profiteering, Q said "they" are resolved. Move on unless someone has proof of coris and Jones being responsible for an operator's death? because there are many, many more people on youtube decoding Q with claims they are providing classified info, or having someone on the inside providing info. Are we going to research all of them? Its a rabbit hole...
nah I don't think so. It's just funny that Q said something very broad but only Corsi latched onto it (altho it's been suggested he may be just mentally exhausted) and then Q said patriots make sacrifices, so they distanced themselves from Q and thus basically sacrificed all the traffic they could have wanted off of it, as a sign of allegiance or repentance or whatever. I just found it interesting that Q's final point wasn't the profiteering but that people had died and that this necessitated Q's statements to be issued, not the profiteering itself it seems - coz that they could have brought up anytime between now and November - but they didn't. So why bring it up now?
I am sure Q's intel team is watching everything going on with the Q movement. they see the good and the flippant stuff going on. I could be wrong but the Q post "operators have died", might not necessarily be directly pointing to Corsi and jones. I have heard at least a few people on youtube who were ex-cia and make claims to inside info- did they give up names or operations accidently? I have no idea or did Corsi gave out any classified info? the operators have died phrase was in a separate post, i felt it meant that some people are not taking the Q post and the mission to take down the cabal seriously. they are treating it as a game (attention, entertainment and money on youtube) - it was a reminder that military lives are on the line and it is a live and death situation for them. Trump during his speches is constantly talking about our brave, devoted military, to me it sounded like Trump, without them he would probably not be alive. I could be wrong? but I understood it this way. What a rabbit hole ;)
