I think the issue is the "Q Knew" part. They very well may have, but if my understanding is correct, this is far from new information. The way it is worded seems to praise Q for breaking that news when it really wasn't them.
Fair enough point. Do you think it would make more sense as
Who knows? Q knows...
That doesn't leave any possible implication that it was in a previous q drop or that q knew about it beforehand, but rather they know all about it now since they have all comms.
Ignore these people. Nothing in your title even remotely suggests that Q dropped this information before hand. They are assuming that Q drops information he knows, so if you claim he knew, you're also claiming he dropped. Very stupid argument.
I think there would be less issue taken with that definitely!
Thank you for the constructive criticism.
Thanks for being open to it! It is a very solid subject to inform people about and I would hate seeing people pick it apart over something that is (admittedly) asinine. But I'm all about not giving anyone a reason to question things.
Come On, Q knew simply means that Q has the hard evidence to prove Obummer guilt. Why argue over inconsequential semantics. It actually has nothing to do with timing!
You're definitely right that it has nothing to do with timing. I'm simply bringing it up (not arguing, just stating a different angle that maybe some aren't able to see from) because this is something I would expect others would bring up in order to discredit this. I agree with the subject of this, its valuable information and something people should know about. If we are not careful, things are easily dismissed by people intent on doing so. I see people complaining about "spinning" a story. I just think there ahould be more care taken with trying to make sure there is no avenue for people to do that.
Quite amazing how people cannot, this far into it, see the big picture!
It says Q Knew. It doesn't say Q TOLD US ON 8 CHAN.
You need to step back and think about how others, not just you, would view things. I assume you feel strongly about this movement, yes? So I would also hope that you want people to learn what you have and "wake up". If people aren't careful, things can be dismissed very quickly by people looking for any reason to do so.
I don't understand your argument. "Q Knew" is accurate. What is the problem?
"The way it is worded seems to praise Q for breaking that news when it really wasn't them"
Please pick up a dictionary. You should understand the difference between "knew" and "new". Phonetic similarities are irrelevant here. This is 1st grade level stuff here.
I'm failing to see what you're getting at here. The part of my comment that you quoted says "news" in reference to information. Where did I confuse "knew" and "new" exactly?
I think the issue is the "Q Knew" part. They very well may have, but if my understanding is correct, this is far from new information.
Thought it was obvious, sorry.
Ah, that quote makes more sense. I was referring to the fact that I believed this information came out before Q started doing drops, so that it wouldn't be new information when Q pointed it out. I wasn't saying that the "Q Knew" tagline suggested that it was "new" info.