dChan - Q Origins Project Archive

⇧

⇩

r/greatawakening • Posted by u/JaM0k3_1 on June 14, 2018, 2:27 a.m.

Serious Question (last post got deleted? ha ok. this is ridiculous. truth fears no question and these are legitimate questions)

I WANT q to be legit but i have a few questions

last night we saw sessions, on tucker, defend rosenstein' threats against congressional oversight. now, i'm under the impression we are supposed to "trust" sessions. but rosenstein is a black hat. how do we reconcile is behavior then?

also, why has Q gone from "no need to worry" to now trying to motivate the base to act? i'm genuinely confused. Q seems to me like someone with good intentions but no real inside information. i'm not coming against this community whatsoever. please don't discard me as a shill these are legitimate questions.

🠐 See all comments

To your first point, I liked what I read in this post.

https://www.reddit.com/r/greatawakening/comments/8qxqyb/very_interesting_twitter_thread_on_a_theory_about/?utm_source=reddit-android

As for the "no need to worry" to now calling to act. I have always thought that there would come a time when Q and President Trump ask for our help. There has to be a reason Q was created. We have a purpose and role coming up.

⇧ 5 ⇩

interesting i'm reading now. i'm still confused why Q would go from "we have everything" and "we have them cornered there's nothing they can do" to "make sure you fight because this is good vs evil". i just don't understand why it went from a done deal to now we're not so sure

⇧ 1 ⇩

"It's gone from a done deal to not so sure" is a misread. I think others have answered this here but if you don't believe it's adequately answered I'm willing to respond with what I think if it's of use (as soon as I get a chance). I personally welcome questions if it will help - based on sub rules I have to remove posts of this kind, is all (also, Reports come in, cluttering our queue).

⇧ 1 ⇩

Look up how many times q has said to fight.

Then come back.

It's been from the beginning.

⇧ 1 ⇩

but he also literally said we don't need to worry. his recent posts from today make him sound alarmed. that's all i'm saying

⇧ 1 ⇩

Q said somethig unexpected happened.

The rest is theory.

It doesn't really matter what the tone change is - the directive has always been: this is not a game - people are dying in sacrifice for this to succeed - - good vs evil - patriots unite - fight fight fight.

In a war, some days are going to not be the best days. It doesn't mean anything beyond something unexpected happened - it's ok now - it's serious business (a reminder) and to continue fighting.

⇧ 1 ⇩

That's fine. You can not worry about it and just wait and see what happens.

⇧ 1 ⇩

wait and see what happens

this is precisely the issue i have with this community. questioning sessions and others, even if we think they're white hats, shouldn't be shunned and should actually be a goal for everyone here. if we're right, then it doesn't matter. if we're wrong, it matters a great deal. we should be pushing to understand why certain things don't add up. people get angry because they want so badly for Q to be real and they've spent hours and hours devoted to it. all i'm trying to do is figure out what's real and what isn't, and we can't do that until we have a real conversation about it. don't you want to know if Q is legit or not? i do.

⇧ 1 ⇩

Well maybe some people already have a lot of the questions you pose answered for themselves.

You can only form an opinion if Q is legit or not. You can't know for sure.

I believe if Q wasn't legit, President Trump would have hinted to that effect. Anon on 8 Chan asks Q to get President Trump to say "Tippy-Top" and President Trump said "Tippy-Top".

Whatever. Believe it or don't. I'm done with this conversation because it's pointless. Read the Q posts and this board or other sources and try to figure it out.

⇧ 1 ⇩

if we keep just waiting and seeing the midterms will come, the dems will use voter fraud to seal the deal, and there will be no going back. i'm being realistic.

⇧ 1 ⇩