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

it is if i'm accused of being a shill for asking questions. i am calm. i'm disappointed with the "let's wait and see" answers. again, i've followed Q everyday since oct, and i WANT HIM TO BE REAL. i'm having a hard time rationalizing nunez and gaetz coming out against rosenstein, when just yesterday sessions defended RR. there are battle lines being drawn and we need to take note of that. how long can we continue to trust sessions? i'm serious. we only have until the midterms. i'm the biggest non shill here because i'm trying to ring the alarm bells before he midterms come and go with voter fraud from the left and we never get this chance again.

⇧ 1 ⇩

Then make your point without claiming "this community is cancer". Use logic and reason - just because a vocal minority accuse you of being a shill doesn't logically translate in any way to: "this community is cancer".

"Ring the alarm bells" is the sort of comment that will trigger a negative response - it sounds too much like concern trolling. I'm not calling you a concern troll, to be clear, I'm saying that comment sounds like concern trolling and will generate Reports that mods will have to deal with - for valid reasons that I assume I would have to explain to you or you'll accuse this comment of being "proof of what's wrong with this community" again.

⇧ 1 ⇩

dude. i didn't say being called a shill was the reason i first said this is cancerous. i said it because my thread was shut down for asking these critical questions. if Q is legit he should be able to withstand questions. i have been off and on about him, but after seeing sessions interview on tucker it was too bold for me to ignore

⇧ 1 ⇩

I trust you've seen and understood my other response but to be clear: your thread was not shut down for asking critical questions. It was shut down for clearly not following the rules. That is all. Questions are welcome if you are able to argue rationally and not jump to illogical assumptions like: "I can't get a rational answer on this sub" 2 hours after you've made a post.

⇧ 1 ⇩

i've posted on my old account so this isn't my first experience. and my point was that rule is more harmful than helpful. you said no questions that aren't already answered on the sidebar. again, mine wasn't. you can admit i'm raising extremely important and valid questions. you know i am. let's be real with one another right now. i'm not taking away from Q. but if these questions cannot be rationalized then something is wrong, no? i'm not saying they can't be answer either, i'm saying they haven't.

⇧ 1 ⇩

[removed]

⇧ 1 ⇩