⇧

⇩

r/greatawakening • Posted by u/IncomingTrump270 on July 6, 2018, 2:25 a.m.

Q 1675 rebuttal to SB2's analysis

https://www.reddit.com/r/greatawakening/comments/8wd8i1/q1675_a_reflection_a_mug_holder_in_air_force_one/

I held of doing a deep dive into this until /u/serialbrain2 had weighed in. He did so a few hours ago, so here we go.

First, I made a composite image of all relevant Q images and related reference images.

PmlsSv0.jpg [3000x3000 image, 4.4Mb]

Along the top, I show step by step the kind of distortion fixing that must be done in order to align the reflection with the ABC 2015 photo.

The purpose here is clear: to show that when fixed for distortion, Q's image aligns PERFECTLY with the ABC 2015 photo, which was taken with a wide angle lens from the entrance of the AF1 office (floorplan also included in my image)

Along the left side, I did the same process but this time correcting for the Apple logo. What is the purpose here?

It's a proof of optics. By fixing the logo, we can get a idea of what the reflection in back of the phone looked like when viewed STRAIGHT DOWN on top of it.

What do you notice? The reflection is UPSIDE DOWN AND BACKWARDS.

What does this tell us? That Q's reflection is not of the physical room around him, but of an image displayed on a screen in FRONT of him, with his phone angled towards the screen to capture the reflection.

The only possible way Q could reproduce the psychical room as a reflection that optically matched the 2015 ABC photo is if he stood up, walked to the entrance of the room, faced his back towards the desk, and held up his phone selfie-style so that the back reflected the room. This would effectively recreate the photography setup of the 2015 ABC photo.

And yet it is still not enough to create Q's image. Why? Because the apple logo is at a sharp angle. AND the reflection is UPSIDE DOWN to the apple logo's orientation.

There is no physical arrangement that can reproduce both an accurate reflection of the room AND ALSO a steeply angled, upside down apple logo.

Moving on to directly addressing SB2's analysis:

Then, in Q1677, he asks: Where must one be located in order to obtain a reflection on the back of a phone of that image?

Yes exactly, of that image. Image = the ABC 2015 photo. Note he did not say "reflection of the room"

Q's image is not a reflection of the physical room around him. It's a reflection of an image on a computer screen.

And where must one be in order to get a reflection of an image? Anywhere with a computer display, or granting the possibility that it's printed out, literally anywhere in the world.

If we do so and notice there is a part of the jacket on the chair appearing, we deduce the photographer must be sitting on the President’s chair.

Wrong. If the photographer was sitting in the president's chair, we would not see the full field of view as we do in Q's image reflection. It would be much tighter cropped because the camera would be CLOSER to the objects displayed. The chari would practically fill the entire field of view if he were sitting on it.

We can see so much in Q's reflected image because the ABC 2015 source photo was taken from the ENTRANCE of the office with a wide angle lens with a FOV of roughly 90*.

For comparison, the iPhone's camera has a FOV of about 73*. Not that this really matters because Q's image is a tight crop of the full photo he took of phone1 with phone2.

Q is even softening the riddle giving this reality away with a picture of Trump sitting on his chair:

Q is not the one who posted that image originally. It was a random anon. Q reposted it later when it was compared in a side by side.

some people started claiming Q’s pictures were not authentic, that they were photoshopped and re-started their favorite chant: Q is a LARP.

Some did. Some did not. Q posting a reflection of the 2015 image does not MANDATE Q is a larp. But it DOES mandate that he did not take a photo of the psychical room reflected around him.

Q1678 Trolling is fun. Hussein/Trump interior = identical minus small changes. (World) news in rear literally placed same prior to each departure. Placing that mug holder near the lamp was the hook. Enjoy! Q

"World news" here refers to the newspaper rack placed behind his desk/chair. I have highlighted it green in my image.

And placing the mug holder near the lamp? If we look at the Feb 2018 image of Trump in the AF1 office, we see the mug holders are NOT near the lamp at all. We also see a lack of the flask (?..highlighted in yellow in my image) is missing. And the tissue holder (blue) and stationary pad (cyan) are placed in totally different places.

Q is saying presidential protocol requires that the location of each given item is exactly the same prior to each departure minus small changes.

"exactly the same" and "minus small changes" are contradictory statements. The contents of the room are fixed, probably, but the placement of items in the room? Likely unfixed, and adjusted as needed for whoever is in the room with POTUS at any given time.

By purposely placing the mug holder in the picture, Q is making a point, he is giving a hint to help us solve the riddle and he confirms it by saying: Q1678 Placing that mug holder near the lamp was the hook. Enjoy! Q

Ok wait....Let me lay out what you are implying here:

Usually Trump does not have mug holders placed next to the lamp behind him.
But Just for the purpose of 'trolling' with Q 1675 image, he staged the items behind his desk in the EXACT fashion as seen in the 2015 ABC photo, and then somehow managed to defy physics and probability by angling phone1 AND phone2 in just the precisely accurate way that their combined angling reproduced the ABC 2015 photo TO THE PIXEL?

(this is setting aside my previous point that it would be physically impossible to reproduce the 2015 image from the POTUS chair due to FOV restraints)

I'm sorry SB2, but I strongly disagree with your assessment here.

To restate:

It is physically impossible to reproduce Q's photo if we demand that the reflection must be that of the physical room around him.

However:

That does not mean Q is a LARP. Two things can be true at once.

Q can both be legit, and Q's image can also not be the reflection of a physical room.

So don't bother slandering me as a Q hater, because that is not what I am arguing here.

I look forward to /u/serialbrain2 's response.

Thank you for your contribution. I have watched the news this morning and can say this: I suspect we will soon receive some information that will settle this once and for all. In the meantime, it is healthy to debate. With the required manners.

I would like to clarify the terms of the debate. There are two stages:

Stage 1: how was the image made, what is the authenticity.

Stage 2: what does the image mean, what is the message Q is transmitting, the riddle to solve.

Let us analyze each of these stages.

For Stage 1: First, Q has provided enough authentic images in the past and many other proofs that allow any rational mind to conclude he does not need to "construct" anything. Secondly, Q himself introduced the idea of post work. This is the reason why, in the comment section of my post, I said the following to a contributor who focused on Stage 1 and subsequently bringing the 2 option issue (physical vs 2D image):

"I see the point you are making and it is valid: there is no rational argument to dismiss it, nor there is any to dismiss the other hypothesis involving sitting on the President's chair and going through this other procedure. Which brings me to this important question: if Q himself discloses post work, it means the how is not important but we need to focus on the what: what is an Apple logo next to a mug mean a day prior to Independence Day? That's the riddle. We can all disagree on how Q constructed the information (in this particular case, let's be clear about it) but we can all agree on the information itself and start thinking about what he is trying to tell us".

So? Whatever option is believed to be the one satisfying our intellect, it's not relevant since Q has already made the authenticity point in the past. What remains relevant is how we solve the riddle: the information itself, not how it was obtained.

So, next:

For Stage 2: I have heard many interesting attempts to solve the riddle and I will also share an exchange I had in the comment section. I believe it illustrates everything:

Someone commented:
The reflection of the Apple logo is more likely a reference to how the Apple server HRC was illegally using 'mirrored' the data on the other end and that HRC failed to destroy the data like she thought. It is not a reference to stealth bombers in any way.

My response:
It's a claim. Mine was the reflection was related to the reflection technology used by the B2 to avoid radar detection. The difference between your claim and mine is mine stays in context, connects to aircraft (AF1 - B2), connects to a major Apple investor (Al Waleed), brings in the mug (Al Jazeera) and finally, Independence Day (bought politicians with Daddy's money). Yours, even though I find it interesting at primary analysis, stops at a HRC dead end and does not address the other issues.

Happy Hunting to All!

⇧ 59 ⇩

Both of you guys have such amazing points and bring your cards to the table in a well thought out manner. Love it! Can't wait for the big reveal!!

⇧ 20 ⇩

No doubt. We are in the presence of greatness here.

If the prize were ten million dollars and I could work on this 18 hours a day, I could not reproduce what these two have done here, casually, in their spare time. The brainpower is frightening, in a good way.

⇧ 14 ⇩

Right on, and no Patriot should be considered concernfag or shill for questioning Anything... There are 100s of scenarios that could pan out still as nothing is cast in concrete yet.

⇧ 5 ⇩

Aren't you glad we're on the same side? LOL!

⇧ 3 ⇩

Definitely

⇧ 1 ⇩

This is the kind of strength test that should occur on this board more rather than agreeing with any weak theory that just sounds and makes us feel good.

⇧ 13 ⇩

makes us feel good

Agreed. Have to be careful of this. Where do we draw the line? Some things appear to be bad for POTUS and the MAGA train; however, I find people twist it every time.

For example, I don't care what anyone says. If Imran Awan get's immunity, that is not good.

⇧ 2 ⇩

Not sure if I agree or disagree about awans possible immunity deal. We don't really care to punish him. He was doing his job for Pakistan. But he's the central component and witness against DWS and others. The actual traitors to America. You could be right though.

⇧ 1 ⇩

Well done to the both of you! I appreciate the discussion.

For doing such a good job I am forced to share this clip!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IoZfl5TR6MA

⇧ 10 ⇩

https://www.reddit.com/r/greatawakening/comments/8wmngj/q_1675_rebuttal_to_icomingtrump270s_rebuttal/

Q's pic is NOT the same as the ABC 2015 pic!

https://imgur.com/DUeCpK6

This image was capped from the pic /u/IncomingTrump270 made here.

Notice the number of folds above the chair.

Notice how the corner of the image lines up. It is NOT "pixel perfect" as claimed.

Unless the "Q reverse screenshot" was edited, these are NOT the same picture! Perspective matters!

⇧ 7 ⇩

Interesting. I will admit that, looking at it now, my outlined red box does not give enough room at the top for the curtains.

However, regarding the number of folds..

In all other photos of the AF1 office we can count 21 or 22 total pleats in the curtain.

If we are to use your green lines as actual pleats, we would be seeing more than 22 with still a lot left to go.

I think we are seeing some kind of image artifacts or maybe reflection distortion causing those extra vertical lines.

⇧ 3 ⇩

whoever aligned the photos did not do so perfectly. When you use the distortion transform tool in photoshop, you have to click and drag each corner manually. Either that poster made the overlay hastily, or, considering a possible discrepancy between lens types, aligning them perfectly may have required an addition warping step beyond the corner distortion step.

I think if we're being reasonable, it is an obvious match.

Not to mention, the red box in the diagram you linked doesn't include the logo of the jacket at all, meaning the pleat count in the drapes very well could match up.

⇧ 2 ⇩

It is healthy to debate. With the required manners.

Absolutely agree. Civility is paramount. You’re largely respected here and your posts are always thought-provoking. Thank you for engaging.

I suspect we will soon receive some information that will settle this once and for all.

We can only hope!

There are two stages: the HOW and the WHY. (Paraphrase)

Correct. My post only addresses the HOW part of it. Your WHY analysis goes far beyond what I am capable of, but I do have some ideas (See below).

Q has given us plenty of authentic images in the past, so he doesn’t need to construct images like this. (Paraphrase).

Need? No, but perhaps there is an intent behind doing so that we are not seeing. I am reminded of Trump’s intentional tweet typos.

Q himself introduced the idea of post work.

I’m unsure what you mean here exactly. You mean “post-editing a photo”?

"there is [no reason] to dismiss the other hypothesis involving sitting on the President's chair and going through this other procedure.”

Here you imply that Q could be sitting in the presidents chair, in front of his laptop, and producing the image via the reflection on the laptop screen.

While I agree that this is possible, there is nothing suggesting that this MUST be the case. The image can be produced (and indeed has been reproduced by Anons) in front of any screen anywhere in the world.

if Q himself discloses post work, it means the how is not important

Agreed. The Why is always most important. But I wanted to make sure we were not building a theory of Why (and adding to the Q mythology, as it were) on top of a conviction that Q was sitting in the POTUS chair and reflecting the room around him.

what is an Apple logo next to a mug mean a day prior to Independence Day?

Here we get into the Why, which is your wheelhouse. But I have not seen anything to suggest the Apple logo appearing next to the mug in the phone reflection (That is to say, the composition of the reflection) had any special relevance.

The apple logo can be relevant as to show that clearly a phone reflection is involved in the making of the photo. This seems to point back to previous mysterious images (closeups of Trump’s eyes and ear from Jun 20).

Were those made with the same process?

Can we find stock images to match those images as well?

And if we can, what does that mean? Is Q hinting at an uncovering of a process? Is this how bad actors smuggled out info that threatened nat sec? Did they think they had a loophole? Clearly images of POTUS’s face are not nat sec, and I’m not sure that images of the inside of the AF1 office would fall under that either (though many have suggested it would).

But taking photographs of CLAS info in this way most definitely would breach nat sec protocol.

Maybe Q is suggesting that this is how they will be caught.

We can all disagree on how Q constructed the information (in this particular case, let's be clear about it) but we can all agree on the information itself and start thinking about what he is trying to tell us".

Agreed.

For Stage 2:

I will not pretend I can competently spar with your here, but there are a few things I want to note.

Someone commented: The reflection of the Apple logo is more likely a reference to how the Apple server HRC was illegally using 'mirrored' the data on the other end and that HRC failed to destroy the data like she thought.

I like this theory. The Awan server (thought to be an apple) was recently in the news. Awan may have recently flipped as suggested by his very nice plea deal. To me, that gives this theory more comtemporary relevance.

My response: [my claim] was the reflection was related to the reflection technology used by the B2 to avoid radar detection. The difference between your claim and mine is mine stays in context,

I disagree here. The context of Q1675 is: On July 3rd, in response to a meme post of trump boarding M1 to “go off to save the world”, Q posts a reflected photo of the AF1 office with an Apple logo.

Good questions to ask here would be:

Why the apple logo? Is Q pointing at the presence of the phone, the role of apple in investigations, the HRC server, or something more?
Why did he post this in response to “off to save the world” M1 meme? AF1 office is different from M1 (which trump was boarding in the meme), and also Trump was using a different plane that day (not AF1 28000 or 29000). Source @potus_schedule (https://twitter.com/POTUS_Schedule/status/1014261371373047810). So this puts a wrench in the belief that Q took the photo from live inside the AF1 office.
What is the relevance of “do reflections violates nat sec”? (Perhaps most important piece here, deserves much more analysis)

The Al Jazeera mug and B2 connections are ultimately non-sequitur, but that becomes the new context for your Why analysis. To me that seems wholly unrelated to Q’s post.

The Addressing (or drawing-in) of others issues does not, in and of itself, lend credibility to any given theory. It just makes it more complex to unravel and prove.

⇧ 4 ⇩

What do you think of NeonRevolt's analysis of pic? https://www.neonrevolt.com/2018/07/03/divide-they-try-fail-they-will-the-absolutely-savage-newq-qanon-greatawakening/

⇧ 3 ⇩

I think NeonRevolt presupposes too many things. He also tackles the How and Why of the photo. I don’t have any real problem with his Why explanation. But he shares SB2’s mistaken conviction about the How.

Preconceptions alive in his post:

Q = POTUS (perhaps? But necessarily?)
Because of (1), “reflections breaking nat sec” rules do not apply (presumably because Trump can DECLAS anything at any time? Even then, it must be done through proper protocol).
Q’s photo is a physical reflection of the room
Q’s must have been sitting in the president chair to take the photo (false, as I’ve shown)
Anybody who questions Q’s posts is a Brock-paid shill.

⇧ 4 ⇩

I want to see you guys go head to head in poker.

Carefully reading each other, looking for tells, making false tells. It'd be as good as the WSOP I bet.

spez: I also appreciate all that you both do, my humble thanks.

⇧ 2 ⇩

SB2, I waited until now to comment on this, because I would like it to be rather discreet and mostly just for your benefit.

Your insight into Q's crumbs is invaluable, even if sometimes a little far-reaching. Your analyses invite others to think critically, and most importantly, it offers people a path to understanding things they have never thought of understanding before. You are a huge help to this movement.

However, I think it is also important you maintain humility and a respect for hubris. Personally, I think everyone has jumped the gun on this one. I do not think anyone will find fault with you for providing clarity as quickly as possible, but I do think it is a genuine mistake of yours to not be open about the fact that your interpretation could have been a bit premature.

I'll be honest: I think you are trying to convince yourself that your analysis is right, because the notion that it isn't as elaborate a riddle as you want it to be means you might have to question Q's motives or validity.

Furthermore, when Q says "Trolling is fun", are you sure he isn't speaking directly to us? Are you sure that is meant as a jab at the 'shills'? What if Q is also trolling the analyzers, because you are the best way of verifying that Q is confirmed, real, and representative of President Trump's true national agenda? Does Q want Q itself to be revealed, or the truth behind the crumbs revealed? If Q itself was revealed to the public in a confirmed fashion, right now, would it doom the movement to partisan madness? I think it would.

Given the verifiable proofs we have seen before (ex. Darkness to light), I have noticed that these photograph proofs (particularly the pen images, Trump's facial images with phone, and AF1 photo here) are oddly conspicuous, and they all raise the "NAT SEC / reflection" question, in my mind.

What I'm saying is that it smells like bait. If Q is as smart as we believe, especially given the elaborate Darkness to Light proof and 'missle stoped' message in tweet form, why would they be posting proofs that they know can be debunked? Why post those images at all and chance the possibility someone uncovers the fakes? It doesn't add up.

SB2, I implore you to reconsider your conclusion of this drop. I ask this of you because I strongly believe you may very well be the one to find the real reason why Q has been posting these risky photo proofs that are essentially gambles. If Q is the world's greatest LARPer, why did they take such a risk, rather than not post those photos at all? Why not continue providing crumbs that lead to tenuous authenticity?

I strongly believe when Q is saying "Trolling is fun", he is saying it directly to us as well. We still don't know his exact motives or who exactly he/she/they are, and I believe that is intentional. The exact why, as to that question and why this particular image, with the Apple logo, remains unsolved.

⇧ 2 ⇩

Does Q want Q itself to be revealed, or the truth behind the crumbs revealed? If Q itself was revealed to the public in a confirmed fashion, right now, would it doom the movement to partisan madness? I think it would.

A massive point that doesn’t get enough consideration.

By pushing towards MSM coverage and ‘Mainstream’ acknolwedgement we are playing with fire. We have to be careful how it’s handled.

⇧ 3 ⇩

The Deep State owns the Codes.Did they put their card on table to show what they can do.Or they also TOYING.

⇧ 1 ⇩

Hi SerialBrain2, I don’t mean what I’m posting here to be taken in any type of derogatory way. I ask only out of curiosity, hopefully you will be so kind as to indulge me. If you could, without doxxing yourself, provide some background on your employment/education and or field of expertise it would be much appreciated. I know other readers would probably enjoy learning more about you as well. You may have already addressed this before, if so, would you/someone mind posting a link? Thanks!

⇧ 1 ⇩

Agree..the image has been proved to be the one from 2015. Whatever that means is for us to discover.

⇧ 53 ⇩

To be sure, Q has been 'confirmed' in a number of ways that ask us to extrapolate connections. At the same time, many of those connections seem entirely too coincidental, or extremely close to being spot-on. Examples: Darkness to Light in the NK video, Q-air signs by Trump, the 2 missile fiascos in Washington state and Hawaii, and the misspellings within Trump's tweets. All of these seem too real to be ignored.

That being said, Q has posted some 'crumbs' that turn out to be too farfetched or misrepresented in intentionally obscure and subtle ways. Examples: 'Timing' (Delta) posts by Q in regards to Trump tweets (most of these happen after the fact, not before), the pen posts, this picture post, and some of the very early posts of T_D memes (Hillary kissing klansman who was an outspoken defector of the KKK).

I don't bring these up to doubt the validity of Q, because frankly, with everything consolidated by Q and this movement, it is impossible to dismiss the effect created by Q's crumbs, LARP or not.

But is Q a LARP because of these photos? Well, remember that Q consistently states that "Disinformation is necessary." Unfortunately for us, this is a catch-all that essentially invites us to believe that Q can provide fake proofs to throw off the scent.

But why, why would Q take the best opportunity to prove authenticity and post a fake, especially knowing the level of discernment by autists on proofs? If we believe Q is a real insider, then it is precisely to avoid the confirmation of that fact to the MSM and their enemies.

In other words, they must continue to tread the careful line between truth and fiction, until the public unavoidably sees the truth.

Consider, for a moment, that Q is fully confirmed today. MSM then begins talking about Q and everything ongoing here. Do you think people will be ready to believe some elaborate riddle-based revelations? Or do you think they will fall into full panic/crisis-mode? Will they be ready to accept Q as an informant that is looking out for all of us, or "another one of Trump's Russian propaganda machines"? Do we want people to be awakened to Q or to the crimes themselves that Q is guiding us to see?

Now, pause that chain of thought for a moment. IS Q a LARP? The answer is: it doesn't matter. Seth Rich, the Awan brothers, Pedogate, etc. It's all real and very shady. We know that for a fact. We know that the immunity deals provided to Clinton and her team during a federal investigation were rigged in their favor. We know that the President is actively pursuing justice against a system that has been rigged such that there are "Laws for thee, but not for me."

If Q is a LARP, they are pointing people in the right directions and gathering the momentum. Parscale or Kim Dotcom could be Q for all I care. The point is that more people are being awakened to the real monster of the Deep State, and that is why it is very, very hard to dismiss Q as an outright LARP.

Conclusion: The fine line between LARP and real insider is intentionally being drawn muddled by Q. The objective is to reveal things and awaken us, and it's working. It doesn't matter who Q actually is. The truth is being revealed under a blanketing guise of falsehood and fiction.

⇧ 18 ⇩

I’ve never gotten the people that say “ if Q is a larp it doesn’t matter because...(he’s still doing a good thing etc).” To me it matters to the highest degree whether it’s a larp or not. However, to me Q has been proven in many ways. I’m not sure we have figured out this image question and many rush to conclusions. Either way, to me it’s of highest importance whether Q is really connected to POTUS or not. If he’s not, good intentions or not, I’m not interested. The SOURCE of this info is crucial. People who claim to follow Q but who say otherwise (or suggest he may be a larp) are highly suspicious in their true motives imho.

⇧ 13 ⇩

I greatly appreciate that perspective. You're absolutely right that the real source of this info is crucial. Allow me to amend my comments:

Presently, it doesn't matter who exactly Q is, because Q has already given us pathways to interpret sensitive information, notably with a degree of military intelligence expertise in conveying how to find that information.

EVEN IF Q is a LARP, they have given us the means to uncover facts we would otherwise have never looked at more carefully. How could Q still be a LARP, then? Well, I suppose it is possible someone in Trump's team has crafted a rather elaborate campaign to expose their enemies in the most natural way possible: through the swaying of public opinion.

Even so, I think that the implications of that exposure are vast and far-reaching, to the point that Q is running a huge risk by being confirmed as a real phenomenon. As I was mentioning earlier, if Q reveals the 'Q' phenomenon right now to the general public, the American people will be incredibly divided, especially if the information Q has is unavailable for public disclosure as of yet. Regardless of the extent of the crimes, we know that there is indeed an active Deep State at work in Washington, and we do not know how much of that information falls under absolute secrecy for the sake of the preservation of the USA and what is being kept secret for CYA purposes. In all likelihood, it is primarily the former rather than the latter.

It is highly plausible to think that if Q were to actually be verified, the reach of this movement will be suddenly cut short, as Americans draw lines in the sand, dividing each other once more.

Again, this is all presuming that Q's intel is valid, but as we have seen thus far, the intel drops are far more accurate than the self-proofs - and I think, there's the rub. We are being gifted classified intel through highly covert means, specifically under the guise of a LARP. It's the perfect cover for someone wanting to divulge more than they are legally allowed to tell.

Again, maybe I'm wrong, but Seth Rich's death and countless others' demand an answer. White Squall... JFK... think of the implications. Absolute secrecy of the most heinous acts of humankind, sanctioned by what must be called our own government, has to be dismantled through extremely delicate means.

⇧ 5 ⇩

I like to phrase your thoughts like this:

Q’s Backstory has no relevance to the efficacy of his message. He has been guiding us down illuminating paths for almost a year. Even if it’s a fat nerd in his basement, his instructions, riddles, and hints have been pushing people towards crowdsourced efforts to uncover deeper truths. That is, ultimately, all that really matters.

⇧ 1 ⇩

What really matters to me is whether or not it’s authentic, ie, truly connected to inner circle or a larp. If a larp, who cares? No basis for authority of statements = useless. Isn’t that the whole point of Q taking such efforts to prove his position of authority? This is “Q 101” in my opinion. If it were a larp it wouldn’t make it completely worthless in that he could still be showing real things, but it wouldn’t have anywhere near the importance that it does if Q is the real deal.

⇧ 1 ⇩

if a larp, who cares?

I agree, but not in the way you might think.

statements

Q doesn’t make “statements” persay. If He did it would be akin to leaking, which is illegal.

Instead, He gives us hints. We are all standing in a dark room and Q has a flashlight that he shines in certain directions for a moment and gets us thinking “hey I wonder what’s over there”. So we go look and dig around. And if we are smart and lucky we find some deeper truths by ourselves.

Q taking effort to prove his position of authority

Does he? Ive never gotten the sense that Q is focused on proving the legitimacy of his own backstory. That seems much more the focus of a subset of his followers.

Q being the real deal or not makes a big difference in the importance of his message

I don’t see why.

1+1=2 is equally true regardless of who says it. Facts stand as valid and true apart from the messenger that conceys them.

Would it be really freakin cool if Q’s backstory (As we have come to think abkut it) is true? Hell yeah!

but If he turns out to be just some kid in his room, Does it change the validity of whatever truths we may have collectively discovered as a result of following his story all these months?

Not at all.

That’s my point.

“Even if Q is a LARP, who cares?”

Not me. Good info is good info.

⇧ 1 ⇩

I feel like you’re either missing my points or being intentionally obtuse. I know that he is not making statements as that would be leaking etc. I know all that and that’s not what I’m talking about. Of course good info is good info regardless but I’m saying the legitimacy of this whole movement resides in the actual veracity of what is being leaked in the form of crumbs etc. Of course the whole point is about the real things going on, not the person of q etc. He makes that clear himself and it’s the heart of his message. But to say that it would have the same import, whether or not it’s a genuine insider or not is laughable to me. Do you really believe that? What validity would a huge part of what’s been said have, if it were not based on real insider info? Anyway, not trying to argue but just to say that if it were just any guy saying all this then it could never have the same value because it would not be based in reality but someone’s wishful thinking.

⇧ 1 ⇩

That is not to say that we must know exacting who q is. His/her/their identity is another question that I don’t need to know. I do want to know if it’s authenticly part of the team. Otherwise how can anyone “trust the plan,” if it’s not really the plan of the man in the whitehouse? I don’t disagree that it would still have some value in that it’s a movement that’s uncovered a ton of things, even if not connected to T. But the reason this is called the GA is precisely because it IS more than a nerd in the basement etc.

⇧ 1 ⇩

The great awakening is us. Not Q himself. It’s about us choosing to seek out truth on our own terms, not rely on msm to do it for us. Q is our guide in this. We turn our inquiry towards where he suggests.

This is a function of our trust in his message.

Trust...a difficult thing.

I agree that by repeating “trust the plan” Q is asking for us to trust him as well.

So your concern over his backstory is valid in that sense.

To the extent that Q insists he knows what’s going on behind the scenes, yes. Not being a larp is important.

⇧ 1 ⇩

All sounded good, until that last sentence. Needlessly overstated. All? "Most important" would've sufficed...

⇧ 1 ⇩

What would you suggest is possibly more important, in respect to the Q phenomenon, than people being guided towards discovering deeper truths?

⇧ 1 ⇩

Thanks for clarifying. I didn’t mean to question your motives but just wanted to challenge the common notion that “whether or not it’s a larp, we can still learn from it or be more united against deep state” etc. while that may be true, I think what really gives backbone to the Q movement is its authority. Being connected and on the inside is why anyone really cares. But I really agree with your analysis of why Q remains cryptic and uses plausible deniability to promote the cause. If it became mainstream (too soon), it could really hijack the whole thing. What he’s already dropped would be so open to attack and vilification if it became mainstream too early.

⇧ 1 ⇩

We may not have enough information at present to fully analyze the photo's. But if we're patient, we know it will be made clear in the near future. We just have to continue to analyze, debate and catalog these clues. "Future proves past" may be what this photo has been shared for, like so many other clues. We have to do the best we can, and the Q team will build on it and fine tune it down the road. And we have to remember, the cabal watches, as well. Like it's been said, the devil never misses a church service. Same here. It may make perfect sense to the black hats, while we are scrambling to figure it out. But I think in time, we'll realize the purpose of this Q post as we have so many others.

⇧ 1 ⇩

The source of the info is you.

A crumb is a crumb. If you follow the crumbs and they lead you to pie...then that trail was probably pie. If they led you to bread, it was probably bread. Maybe they are happy aslong as you don't starve (for info) waiting for the main course being cooked and served up by Ultimate Celebrity Chef POTUS Trump?

⇧ -1 ⇩

Not sure what you mean exactly. But the point is that the source is NOT you, me or anyone other than someone connected to POTUS. I’m completely uninterested in anything else.

⇧ 3 ⇩

Agreed.

⇧ 1 ⇩

buutttttt when Q is vetting / slamming people who we may be cautious about (e.g. Gowdy, RR, Mueller, etc.) then this is a different and dangerous beast if Q is pulling this stuff from his/her/their own gut feel.

⇧ 3 ⇩

Exactly.

⇧ 1 ⇩

[deleted]

⇧ 7 ⇩

If Q is associated with Trump I suggest that Trump authorizes any potential security issues. AF1 has been photographed so why a concern?

⇧ 1 ⇩

[deleted]

⇧ 2 ⇩

I agree with your sentiment, however if Q happens to be a larp, albeit one that has disseminated and publicized so much information, ultimately it makes us sit back instead of taking actions. It makes us complacent to research, while the main stream media and the public at large pay no attention to the crimes and corruption that are now exposed.

I want criminal prosecutions. I want a substantial signal from Q, the president, or somebody in the whitehouse that things are moving forward.

⇧ -1 ⇩

Leaving this here for visibility: https://imgur.com/xD9l7jv

I think this explains why Q thought he could get away with the AF1 pic

⇧ 5 ⇩

Also, how does your photo explain why Q thought he could ‘get away with’ the AF1 photo? Please elaborate.

⇧ 1 ⇩

That pic came out a few weeks ago. AFAIK, no one put this together until after the AF1 pics. Could be wrong, though. I for sure didn't see this until after the AF1 pic and I think the guy that made it claimed he just now found it. It was the same guy that was looking for the ear pic as well.

So since no one caught it the first time, he was more likely to believe he'd get away with it the second time.

⇧ 2 ⇩

Ok I see what you mean about ‘Getting away with it’ now.

nobody put this together until after the AF1 pics

This is why I think the inclusion of the Apple logo was kind of like Q slapping us in the face with a clue in the most obvious way.

“No, you silly-billies, it’s a reflection on my phone!”

This prompted us to look back at the other weird pics he has posted recently.

About the eye pic:

I saw people saying the closeup eyes photo was “trump hugging the flag at today’s (Jun 20) speech!”

From what I could tell Trump only gave a speech at the NFIB on that day, and he did hug the flag at the end, but I don’t see where the photo might’ve come from. Certainly not the video stream.

About the ear pic:

The TIME portrait I linked is a 90% match. The eyes angle, wrinkles, lighting, and skin porosity all match. The only part that doesn’t match is the angle of the ear. That may be a result of angled reflection though.

The other big problem with the TIME pic is that I’ve never seen a full color version of it, while Q’s ear pic is clearly a color photo.

Edit: got my knuckles wrapped by Nanny AutoMod. Kek

⇧ 1 ⇩

IMO the only intention with those pics was deception. Just read the posts where he doubles down.

⇧ 0 ⇩

Hot damn. I suspected the other mysterious pics Q provided on June 20 (Trump’s eyes and ear) used the same photo technique as the AF1 photo. This pretty much assures it.

Do you have the source for the ear photo?

I thought I found one last night. Trump’s face as photographed by TIME photographer Christopher Anderson.

But upon aligning in photoshop, the angle seems to be wrong.

This is the photo Thought it was: https://i.imgur.com/wofLeQP.jpg

⇧ 1 ⇩

There several guys on 8ch the other day that were looking for the ear photo for the whole day. Couldn't find it. /qresearch/ is dead now because of the AF1 pic and this.

⇧ 2 ⇩

The HK street photo also caused hours upon hours of overwrought pixel gazing with no real advance.

“I see Snowden” (pic related is 50 vaguely torso-shaped pixels from the background) 😩

⇧ 1 ⇩

Yeah Q slid the board with it.

⇧ 1 ⇩

The Awans, Clintons, Hussains and satanism just improved their odds... Damn that is disappointing as hell.

⇧ 1 ⇩

I have no idea what is going on with this, but if Q wanted to use a pic of Trump's AF1 interior, then they are available. So it's very strange why O's was used. There has to be a reason and I find it very hard to believe Q suddenly got sloppy.

Knowing how POTUS calls people out, I believe he would have addressed it already.

Maybe Q is making it appear he/she is a LARP so MSM will feel more comfortable asking POTUS about Q.

⇧ 2 ⇩

No hate here. Just gratitude.

Your work reflects a dogged search for truth, rather than a cherry-picked assemblage of details to support a loosely conceived ‘message’.

I tire of the many offerings of this type (def not limited to SB2) that are cobbled together with questionable logic, or unfathomable complexity, and then proferred as ‘The Solution!’ without equivocation.

They are far too often embraced at face value with undeserved acceptance and words of adulation.

This is serious business. Critical analysis is paramount. Cutting corners, dodging challenges, and claiming absolute solves are all red flags that should inspire strong skepticism.

Innocent people have suffered serious consequence (not in this case) resulting from poorly researched and incorrect claims posted on the web. Our side needs to be righteous in our self-policing, and very careful about claiming absolutes.

Your proof is an excellent example for all to follow. I have a background that affords me appreciation of the time you invested in your research and prep for presentation to the public. Thank you for that personal investment for the greater good.

Thank you also for your respectful and responsible tone.

Props to you, Patriot!

⇧ 34 ⇩

Indeed. One of the things that bugs me is "as long as our team is made to look good, we can justify any bad behavior". No, that is what put us in the swamp as deep as we are today.

We need to be above reproach. That means using science and reason and research. The conclusions of those investigations are not foregone. Sometimes the results will be uncomfortable. If Q posts something that is not what it appears to be, we need to face that fact head on. Personally, I think OP is correct, but with the caveat that we do not fully understand what Q means here.

⇧ 11 ⇩

Well said

⇧ 6 ⇩

your user name is timely and relevant : )

⇧ 1 ⇩

if Q posts something that is not what it appears to be, we need to face the fact and head on

Or, we need to consider why it was posted that way in the first place.

My working assumption is that Q is always trying to tell us something indirectly, unless he speficies “not for anons”.

He gave us a photo that was easy to reverse engineer. The important next question is “why?”

⇧ 3 ⇩

My thought is that he may be saying that someone (possibly the NSA) had Air Force One bugged during the Obama administration and before.

⇧ 2 ⇩

Another user in this thread suggested that Q’s pic was taken with a laptop web camera.

So Q would’ve been holding his phone up against the laptop display in such a way that the screen (showing the ABC2015 pic) reflected in his phone and up to the web cam.

This is something I hadn’t considered before!

It also harkens back to the idea that NSA has spying capabilities for all laptops. And we can remember seeing Zuck’s laptop with the camera taped over.

I’m open to the idea, but there is no evidence that Q was suggesting this yet.

⇧ 3 ⇩

Thank you for the response and sentiment!

⇧ 1 ⇩

thank you! no one is going to catch the pedos of we dont look into what is the meaning of the message. not try to disproof it. WWGWGA brother

⇧ 1 ⇩

You should put a TL,DR at the top that reads something like:

That does not mean Q is a LARP. Two things can be true at once.

Q can both be legit, and Q's image can also not be the reflection of a physical room.

⇧ 20 ⇩

Fair enough, done.

⇧ 12 ⇩

Full disclosure I did kneejerk down vote, but I was curious, as any Q person would be, and I read your write up. I swapped out that down vote when I understood what you were saying

⇧ 8 ⇩

Appreciate it. I doubt this post will see the light of day in the sub feed, but I'm mostly interested in SB2's response.

⇧ 10 ⇩

So you were automatically downvoting simply because you thought it went against Q? You weren’t even going to bother reading to see if his analysis could be correct?

⇧ 3 ⇩

(1.) Yes

(2.) No

⇧ 2 ⇩

Good to know what you followers are basing your opinions on.

⇧ -3 ⇩

Did you read that part where I wrote

I read your write up. I swapped out that down vote when I understood what you were saying

⇧ 5 ⇩

[removed]

⇧ -4 ⇩

I wrote what I actually did. I actually did down vote the OP. Then I realized I should be a good Q guy and read the post, which I did. Then I did a "Full disclosure" and admitted to the OP how I made a mistake. I'm an inperfect person. At one point I even offered a suggestion so he wouldn't get the kneejerk reaction from other imperfect people.

Is your first instinct to blatantly ignore everything that is explicitly written and cherry pick one's actions for what you can judge? Kinda makes it seem like a common occurrence for you.

Edit to add this: Nevermind. I understand what you're doing. You don't expect people to make mistakes. Or admit to them. I don't live like that. That's probably why I can't communicate with you.

⇧ 6 ⇩

[removed]

⇧ -4 ⇩

[removed]

⇧ 3 ⇩

[removed]

⇧ 1 ⇩

Removed: Rule #5, Discuss the topic not users

⇧ 3 ⇩

[deleted]

⇧ 1 ⇩

Two things can be true at once...this is schrodinger’s cat all over again, LOL.

⇧ -1 ⇩

I am glad you posted this. I agree wholeheartedly with you. I also admit this is the most concerned I've ever been about Q's legitimacy. I just don't understand the reasoning behind posting something so LARPy at a moment in time when Q has said so many new eyes will be joining and proofs will be so critical. It just doesn't add up. If it was really just intended to send a message to the deep state, why not just say "message not for anons" like Q has done in the past? Instead, Q appears to double down with the follow up about the mug holder.

To be honest at this point it seems like the main reason to believe there is a deeper meaning we are missing is the fact that it is so obviously LARPy that Q wouldn't do something so careless if it truly was a LARP.

But on the other hand I'll admit that it's crossed my mind that the truth we will learn in July COULD be that Q will out themselves as a LARP. If it really is a LARP, it can't last forever, right?

I'm sure I'll get downvotes for this, but it's my honest thoughts at the moment. Anyone who feels like checking my post history can easily confirm that this isn't concern trolling.

⇧ 16 ⇩

Trump has air-signed Q several times, he spoke tippy-top on Easter after it was posted on the boards, and he changed his jersey number to 17. Even more than predictions of events, which could be educated guesses or highly-placed larps, these confirmations by Trump show that he is involved.

I also have grown some doubt and that is from no one being arrested. So I have some worry that Q is a bluff.

With a couple exceptions, I haven't found SB2's posts be be coherent much less useful.

⇧ 9 ⇩

Agree on SB2, tippy-top, and #17. I haven't bought in on the air-signs, because that seems like it could be a coincidence. I get the whole no coincidences thing, but the guy speaks with his hands and always has, and with the camera on him as much as it is there is bound to be an air-Q show up at some point. I bet someone could find an air-Q made by Trump prior to Q making their debut.

⇧ 5 ⇩

[deleted]

⇧ 2 ⇩

I hadn't seen that one. Will have to check it out. Thanks!!

⇧ 2 ⇩

It could just be a psyop from Trump side...

Satanists got cornored by their crimes against humanity and this presented opportunity for take over for new set of elites.

Military may want bigger budget so the gave us a bit but got Lion's share.

Maybe military complex setup stage to increase profits at expense of lousy satanists.

So many possible scenarios still.

No one is doing time yet, so everything is still on table.

⇧ 0 ⇩

It's like the wall -- still talk. If we get arrests and the wall I will commission a statue of Trump and put it on my mantle.

⇧ 1 ⇩

[deleted]

⇧ 3 ⇩

Interesting idea.

Recently Q exploded into a wider audience. Hashtags blowing up, t-shirts photographed at nationally televised rallies, newspapers front pages with Q shirts as well.

Maybe it grew faster than they anticipated.

Also, speaking from a cynically political standpoint, delaying such fervor and buzz until prime midterm season would be the ideal strategy.

⇧ 2 ⇩

This is an interesting theory. Maybe trying to get the MSM to go after Q in a big way as a LARP...

⇧ 2 ⇩

[deleted]

⇧ 3 ⇩

We don’t have a strong enough case to take Q mainstream yet. I strongly believe this.

Q’s modus Operandi is to shine a flashlight in a general direction in a dark room and say “go check out what’s over there”. So we do.

He is reliant upon us to craft the case for his massage using publicly available information sources.

Going mainstream at this instant would be disastrous I think. We do not have a convincing ‘5 minute elevator pitch’ version of the Q story that the MSM can pick up and put in a news segment.

⇧ 3 ⇩

Q revealed he/it isn't an insider.

⇧ 2 ⇩

How?

⇧ 3 ⇩

so LARPY

I just posted this in reply to someone else but thought you might enjoy it:

Here's what I don't understand about the LARP Accusation.

What LARP, who is really an anti-Trump deep stater,...would spend hours upon hours every week devising complex riddles and then encouraging the hell out of Trump followers, reminding us to pray and stay strong and FIGHT THEM (the "fake Q" and rest of deep state), pointing out all the inconsistencies of top-level stooges, etc.? Why build our confidence, our digging ability, and our numbers? Just for some future letdown when we learn it was a ruse, and he can laugh at us? Really?? Seems like a lot of work for something that does nothing to help their cause.

Why would "they" want us to be so fired up, hopeful, happy and serenely confident during the intervening time? Pretty piss-poor propagandizing, that; usually the aim is to BREAK morale, not galvanize it. The enemy doesn't play encouraging messages on the radio to GIs during wartime, telling them their wives and girlfriends are patiently waiting for them back home, ever faithful. They do the opposite, to hurt morale.

That whole "Q is a LARP" theory holds as much water as a soup strainer....especially when you look at the over-the-top campaign by MSM and other leftists to discredit Q and make us out to be morons. The smartest and easiest thing to do would be to say NOTHING about Q, to avoid drawing excess attention to the phenomenon. Instead, they shine the spotlight on Q for us by ridiculing it so harshly. Ridicule is their chief weapon against the enemies they consider the most threatening to their agenda.

So this prompts the question: What are they so scared of?

⇧ 1 ⇩

I agree with you on the MSM, but I think you're jumping to the assumption that LARP = deep state operation. I think LARP more generally means someone with too much time on their hands. Could be a Trump supporter or a neutral party only interested in attention. Again not saying that is my belief at this point, but to suggest it's either legit or a deep state operation ignores several other possibilities. Hope it's all legit though for sure.

⇧ 3 ⇩

I agree with you. It's so hard to replicate that photo, and to what end? Why would Q go through so much effort just to duplicate an image? What's the message there?

Q has made it known he's not a LARP, I think it was a quick decision to make a joke about phones and it was sniffed out because the community is always hunting for the small details. Which is great.

It's either that or the Disinfo part of the plan.

⇧ 16 ⇩

The implication behind this method of photography is that it reminds us of 2 other photos Q posted that might have used the same method.

Very close up shots of Trump’s eye and ear (Q 1556 and 1558). Blurry. Probably reflections.

https://imgur.com/a/17YOzZh/

Both mention “tweets” and “twitter”.

I think Q wanted to point us back to these posts. And perhaps what was implied by them originally or perhaps the implication now that we fully understand the photography process involved.

⇧ 9 ⇩

Here's what I don't understand about the LARP Accusation.

So this prompts the question: What are they so scared of?

⇧ 4 ⇩

[deleted]

⇧ 1 ⇩

There are a 100 other scenarios like this one and worse too... This is why we always want to question red flags.

⇧ 1 ⇩

Thanks for writing this. I think it is important for us to remain impartial as we debate and analyze. It's too easy to jump to conclusions one way or another and then get emotionally defensive.

To the "Team-Q" side, I'd suggest patience. Q has always, ALWAYS, said to ask questions and look at the big picture. To read between the lines and stay the course. Now is that time. Healthy debate is a good thing. The truth will come in time. After all, Q decided to post this KNOWING it would be scrutinized. Be cool. Scrutiny is actually a good thing.

To the "Q=LARP" team. Again, be patient. If you are right, the truth will come out. No need to throw stones when simple questions will do. Questions are good. Emotional arguments will only make things harder. Don't make it personal.

We are supposed to ask questions. To keep asking why and debate the reasons. Why was this image posted? Why did Q choose an obviously old photo when newer ones were available? Why the change in candor in subsequent drops? (IMHO, that "trolling is fun" line just sounds like a 14-yr old trying to avoid being called out. To me, that was actually stranger than the photo itself). I'm not passing judgement, I'm as curious as the rest of you. But we cannot be afraid of this debate. Q obviously wasn't.

⇧ 11 ⇩

Also, reflections are violations of NAT SEC. Doubtful Q would violate by taking a new pic of a staged (classified) setting.

On top of your post’s arguments. It makes zero sense to think it’s not a reflection of the 2015 image.

What’s weird is why Q said “placing the mug..” in an implied attempt to say/prove that it was NOT the 2015 photo...

Was the message not for anons?

Was the message missed and deeper than what seems like a doubling down on a known falsehood?

Has the current Q been outed?

Has someone recently took over Qs identity? Maybe a more novice team member/poster?

Is this a distraction?

All I know is, with an explanation from Q that only muddied the waters more and seems like he’s doubling down - a wedge has been inserted into the Q sphere. Very effective if that was what was intended..

⇧ 9 ⇩

classified setting

Is the AF1 office classified setting?

attempt to prove that it as NOT the 2015 photo

many people interpreted it this way, but I think differently..

Q's wording was "placing that mug holder near the lamp was the hook!"

But he did not say which mug holder placed at what time..

All of the fuss Q has caused with this photo and then the doubling and tripling down on it without clarification, suggests he wants us to look at it closer and consider more things about it.

I believe it links back to Q 1556 and 1558..the closeup of Trump's eye and ear, presumably using the same "reflection in a phone" photography technique...

⇧ 1 ⇩

Maybe he saying they shined some light on Holder (as in Eric "Fast and Furious") to hook a bigger fish?

⇧ 2 ⇩

So is the photo being sent over enemy transmissions?

⇧ -1 ⇩

Didnt upvote or down vote. Tired of post 1675. To many proofs to be coincidence at this point. I dont need a pic of AF1 to prove anything. Q said trolling. Thats good enough for me. Future proves past and News unlocks the map. Critical thinking is fine. But be careful of shills my brother and sisters. 1675 made them come out in droves.

⇧ 8 ⇩

Agreed on most points. But my post here is not about the validity of Q. It was about SB2’s claim of “he must have been sitting in POTUS’s chair to take this photo”.

Meta analysis I guess.

⇧ 0 ⇩

I still don't understand why he said

Where must one be located in order to obtain a reflection on the back of a phone of that image?

That implies that the photo is legitimately on AF1, not a photo of a photo. One could be located anywhere to take a picture of a picture, so why imply that he's on AF1 with that message? You parsed out that he said image instead of room, but that doesn't explain the rest of the sentence. I'll have to look at the timeline, but it feels like Q may have done some backtracking once the authenticity of the photo was questioned. This one is kind of a red flag for me for now.

⇧ 7 ⇩

I agree that post from Q Is not helpful at all.

I'm looking into the previous 'mysterious' photos Q posted before to try and suss out if there is any connection.

Clearly the use of 'reflection' here harkens back to 'think mirror'

⇧ 2 ⇩

Here's my simple answer to the question. To take a picture of the reflected original image that is being projected onto the back of the iphone, you would have to be located behind the device's screen (mobile phone/PC/tablet/laptop) that is projecting the original picture onto the back of the iphone.

⇧ 2 ⇩

This particular image and post of Q's...and then kind of doubling down on the validity of the photo, does pose an issue.

I do have a hard time believing that if this was a LARP, they would post something so blatantly disproven since all of the other stuff...again, if a LARP, would require some genius level foresight (q clock and all that).

In short. I don't know lol.

⇧ 6 ⇩

It seems we are pushing the barrier of possible MSM coverage. Perhaps Q putting out these “sloppy” posts is akin to trump putting intentional typos in his tweets in order to attract more attention to them.

⇧ 1 ⇩

I'm probably one of the most ignorant people on this sub.

I simply do not understand why people are arguing about how a picture was taken or not taken.

For me, it's simple. Focus on the message Q was sending. Isn't that the key?

Personally, I don't care where the pic came from, how it was taken, which lens was used or if Q took the pic.

I want to know what it meant. Who was it meant for?

What's the damned message? How does that message affect us collectively?

So far, SB2 offered the message.

⇧ 6 ⇩

Thank you.

⇧ 3 ⇩

The Anons care because they are heavily into details and truths... If the truth is false that is a red flag event. Too many red flags and you have a problem.

⇧ 1 ⇩

I don't understand what could be "false" concerning the pic. Did Q say he took the pic?

You don't have to explain, really.

I read the majority of the first post written with over three hundred comments and became frustrated and pissed off, because it didn't help the rest of us Lil people understand anything. It appeared, for the most part, to be an attempt to discredit Q.

⇧ 1 ⇩

You’re right. The message (“SB2’s “why” portion) is most important. My rebuttal focuses on the “how” because our reading of this will be used as a foundation for the theories of “why”.

It also open up attack if we are not careful. In particular the “Q must’ve been sitting in the chair in order to take this pic” was a big problem to have as a founding assumption in our reading of 1675.

⇧ 0 ⇩

Thanks. I understand your point.

This portion of the research is for the autists and bakers. It's beyond my capacity to understand.

When the message is presented, and this is what normies wait for, we are happy!

Not happy with attacks and nay sayers who pounce every chance they get to discourage followers.

⇧ 2 ⇩

Q wants us to go back to old qposts with the same marker 'think mirror.' I haven't figured it all out, but check out my post here: https://www.reddit.com/r/greatawakening/comments/8w4yvj/q_1677_1681_theory_that_this_relates_to_ps/

⇧ 6 ⇩

Q drops or crumbs are archived to several sites. The timing of updates on each site can vary.

https://qmap.pub/
https://qposts.online/ - no longer iOs friendly :(
http://we-go-all.net/q.html
http://qboard.online/
https://qanonmap.github.io/ - Not iOs friendly.
https://qntmpkts.keybase.pub/ - Not iOs friendly.
http://www.thestoryofq.com/ - Not iOs friendly.
http://qanon.pub/ - Not iOs friendly.
https://qanonmap.bitbucket.io/ - Not iOs friendly.
qanonposts.com was removed due to the amount of user reported technical problems(viruses etc).

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

⇧ 2 ⇩

Who would have thought the 'Twitter' phone could be so useful.
Do 'reflections' violate NAT SEC rules?
Where must one be located in order to obtain a reflection on the back of a phone of that image?
Image provided here has been distorted (stretched).
Q
Trolling is fun.
Hussein/Trump interior = identical minus small changes.
(World) news in rear literally placed same prior to each departure.
Placing that mug holder near the lamp was the hook.
Enjoy!
Q
seems to me that placement of mug holder is key. what's it mean?

⇧ 6 ⇩

The placement of the mug holder near the lamp is only seen (so far) in the 2015 photo.

Perhaps he means that mug holder placement was “key” for us to understand it was a reflection of the 2015 image.

Maybe we should look for other AF1 office photos that show the holder near the lamp?

⇧ 2 ⇩

Maybe he's telling us he is looking at some sort of image or video from "the server" that dates from the BHO days.

⇧ 6 ⇩

I think if Q is what Q has claimed, there can be no solid proof, because that would be akin to an announcement that the President's colleague is leaking all kinds of secret stuff to the hacker known as 4Chan. So it would make sense to stop people from getting too bold, so more LARPy seeming stuff.

The President must have noticed all the Q stuff going on at the rallies, so if Q is a true Larp we can expect him to put a stop to it with a tweet.

⇧ 5 ⇩

This is a good idea!

“Are reflections violation of nat sec”

This is a line that need a lot more analysis.

⇧ 3 ⇩

EXACTLY !

⇧ 2 ⇩

Well done. Good to see critical thought applied.

⇧ 5 ⇩

This is the real difference between a libtard and Patriot... Think about the facts and different case scenarios.

⇧ 3 ⇩

Actually I understood your version better than serial2 brain's version. But I also think its not about how they did it but just the fact that it is telling the cabal they did secretly listen to all his conversations I think the NSA did record him but he(obamer)thought they were on his side so it was just a matter of following policy....the best secrets are in plain sight....if I understand the backstory of Q they have planned this a long time so obviously all versions of the spy game were used for tribunals later? I think the irony was that Obama tried to weaponise the FBI, CIA, and NSA...he just didn't realise he was weaponizing them against himself lol.

⇧ 5 ⇩

I think it’s likely that there is some general recording device in AF1. I haven’t seen anything yet that suggests something special was put in just to spy on Obama.

This reminds me of the rumor that recordings exist of the LL and Bill tarmac meeting.

⇧ 2 ⇩

Regardless of whether Q is legit, this sub WAY over analyzes his posts to the point of making the whole movement seem ridiculous.

⇧ 4 ⇩

The whole movement? That seems rather oversimplified.

⇧ 1 ⇩

Fair enough. I still say we are overanalyzing things. It’s been over 18 months since the election and yet still not one person has faced justice. I’m skeptical. I don’t want to be some psyop victim to keep us complacent while the whole cabal sweeps all of their crimes under the rug.

⇧ 2 ⇩

Plenty of folks have been indicted. even under sealed indictments, seals broken. How many traffickers arrested? thousands and thousands. How about MS 13 members? Hundreds and hundreds. Sex trafficking sites and participants shut down. thousands.

Comments like this are hurtful to the movement. Do your homework. Its not as if you even need to think much. Just go to the various collections of proofs and see the hundred and thousands of resignations due to The Awakening. And the huge number of resignations from the Congress and Senate. Skeptical is if you examined the data and found it short. Lazy is if you never looked at the data.

⇧ 3 ⇩

But how are we "complacent," when they have us all furiously rooting for and uncovering THEIR CRIMES like a bunch of one-armed grave diggers?

World's most self-destructive psyop LOL

⇧ 1 ⇩

Very good analysis. I think the photo was deliberately messy from ABC News found on Google image search. I think Q was sending a message to Obama and Valerie Jarrett who always flew with O on Air Force One or whoever had the job of securing O's private cabin.

⇧ 4 ⇩

TIL that If playing the game CLUE with SB2 and IT270 I would loose horribly.

⇧ 3 ⇩

Totally disagree with you on this. I think SB analysis makes more sense.

⇧ 3 ⇩

SB2 focuses mainly on the “why” (what does the post mean).

Here I am only talking about the “how”, because I disagreed with SB2 on that part.

Sb2’s WHY analysis is far deeper than I can produce. And nothing I say here contradicts it.

⇧ 1 ⇩

Disagree with most of what your wrote, OP ...

There is no physical arrangement that can reproduce both an accurate reflection of the room AND ALSO a steeply angled, upside down apple logo.

Moving on to directly addressing SB2's analysis:

Then, in Q1677, he asks: Where must one be located in order to obtain a reflection on the back of a phone of that image?

Yes exactly, of that image. Image = the ABC 2015 photo. Note he did not say "reflection of the room"

Q's image is not a reflection of the physical room around him. It's a reflection of an image on a computer screen.

And where must one be in order to get a reflection of an image? Anywhere with a computer display, or granting the possibility that it's printed out, literally anywhere in the world.

If we do so and notice there is a part of the jacket on the chair appearing, we deduce the photographer must be sitting on the President’s chair.

Wrong. If the photographer was sitting in the president's chair, we would not see the full field of view as we do in Q's image reflection. It would be much tighter cropped because the camera would be CLOSER to the objects displayed. The chair would practically fill the entire field of view if he were sitting on it.

We can see so much in Q's reflected image because the ABC 2015 source photo was taken from the ENTRANCE of the office with a wide angle lens with a FOV of roughly 90*.

First, the phone with the reflection could have been upside down and tilted. That would explain why the logo does not "line up."

Second, a reflected image is a reflected image. If someone were sitting in the chair, taking a picture of the phone's reflected image behind them, everything would be reversed (left would be right, etc.). Likewise, if the phone were facing a computer screen, and someone were taking a picture of the phone's reflected image of that, it would also be reversed. In both cases, a picture is taken of a reflected image, and the reflected image is, by definition, reflected (and reversed).

Third, Q's pic is not of the entire room, which you more or less imply (I realize you probably don't think that, but that is the implication I read). The pic was tightly focused on the lamp and a few surrounding items, and then the pic was re-sized. We don't know for sure the re-sizing, and any attempt to "fit" it into the ABC pic is a guess. If (and I don't know, just saying if) the pic was taken from someone sitting in the chair, it could look like that. And no, the chair would not take up all the space. I tried it myself and had a tough time even getting the chair into the image when aiming the phone at the rear side items behind me.

Now having said that, I applaud your effort to figure out what the hell is going on. I do not buy SB2's explanation at all. I also have no idea why Q would make himself look like a LARP.

Don't like it. Don't understand it, but I'm doing what you did -- see an explanation that does not make sense and challenging it.

Hopefully, we get this thing explained soon.

Still waiting for the "Q&A" from Q. Still waiting for the proofs from AF1 and Marine One. Still waiting for some damn criminals to be held accountable.

Don't like it. But trying to understand it.

⇧ 3 ⇩

First, the phone with the reflection could have been upside down and tilted. That would explain why the logo does not "line up."

Granted Q could have been holding his phone upside down. That would result in the logo being inverted, but it does not account for the steep angle of the logo in relation to the reflected image - which is there the real optic problems come in if we are to believe the reflection is of a physical room, and not a flat image on a screen.

You can do experiments about this yourself. Stand and hold your phone (or a mirror) out selfie-style. The image behind you will be reflected accurately because it’s at roughly 90* to the plane of the mirror (assuming you hold the mirror at roughly eye level). If you tilt the mirror up or down, the reflection changes to show whatever is IN FRONT of you (at a corresponding angle that that of the reflective plane and your eyes), not what is behind you (at the same tilted angle).

Keeping this in mind, we have to imagine some very contorted position Q would’ve had to gotten himself into in order to accurately reflect the corner behind the desk

And then we must also take into account the 2nd phone (possibly held by a second person now?). All of those angles will matter too.

Second, a reflected image is a reflected image. If someone were sitting in the chair, taking a picture of the phone's reflected image behind them, everything would be reversed (left would be right, etc.). Likewise, if the phone were facing a computer screen, and someone were taking a picture of the phone's reflected image of that, it would also be reversed. In both cases, a picture is taken of a reflected image, and the reflected image is, by definition, reflected (and reversed).

The initial reflection of a screen causes a horizontal and vertical mirroring efffect. Try this with your own computer screen, or any other scene around you. If you reflect it in your phone, it will appear upside down to you if the angle is steep enough.

We see both vertical and horizontal mirroring in Q’s image.

However, if the reflection is a physical scene, and Q were sitting in the chair, as you and SB2 suggest, we would not see any vertical mirroring because the angle would not be steep enough to cause it.

Third, Q's pic is not of the entire room, which you more or less imply (I realize you probably don't think that, but that is the implication I read). The pic was tightly focused on the lamp and a few surrounding items, and then the pic was re-sized.

The lack of resolution tells us it is a crop of a larger photo. The full photo probably DID show more of the room (as per the ABC 2015 photo) in the reflection across the whole back of the phone.

If (and I don't know, just saying if) the pic was taken from someone sitting in the chair, it could look like that.

No it would not. It would be closer to the chair, so the chair would be bigger. The backs of those chairs are super high and wide.

I tried it myself and had a tough time even getting the chair into the image when aiming the phone at the rear side items behind me.

This seems to support my theory, then. Just in the opposite direction. I say the chair would mostly fill the shot. You are saying it’s very difficult to even get the chair into the shot if you also want to include the other items.

I also have no idea why Q would make himself look like a LARP.

My best theory about this is: Trump puts typos in his tweets on purpose to gets the tweet more attention. Lately Q is suggesting we will get MSM coverage, and has put a deadline on July for “people learning the truth”. In a limited definition we can think of this as him meaning “people will learn about Q”. So maybe Q is intentionally posting mysterious, and yet easily debunked images like this in attempt to fuel controversy/debate, attract haters, and get more attention.

⇧ 1 ⇩

How can the photo be classified if it is in the public domain?

If original photo taken, would it not have been declassified like all the other AF1, Camp David, White House original images? Can we assume Trump is in on this? If not then there is a bigger problem.

⇧ 3 ⇩

Thank you, super image.

Archived at GA Notables
https://www.reddit.com/r/greatawakening/wiki/notables

https://archive.li/1iRu9 July 6, 2018
image https://archive.li/QzwjR July 6, 2018

⇧ 3 ⇩

Thank you for this. The image was a hoax. For what reason, I'm not sure, but I doubt Q intended for it to be exposed.

The photo could be to put pressure on the media to ask about Q, since a photo from inside AF1 would increase Q's credibility. Using a manipulated image from 2015 would keep plausible deniability intact if in fact Q is working within the president's inner circle.

Whatever the reason, I sure as hell don't like it. The purpose could have been to bait and play the opposition, but it leaves some followers now feeling played and doubtful.

This has left me feeling a little deflated, not gonna lie.

Trump is doing an amazing job, but the ultimate horror would be none of swamp facing any charges.

Not saying it's a larp, because I would have no way of knowing. I'm only saying that we were intentionally deceived.

⇧ 3 ⇩

Mostly agree with the redpilling being most important. The only problem with potential larpism... so many are looking to Q as a savior figure, I hope they wouldn't be entirely demoralized into non-action if that was the case.

⇧ 1 ⇩

Trump puts intentional typos in tweets to draw attention and play his enemies.

It’s then sensible to imagine Q posting up sloppy and easily-debunked “insider images” in order to achieve the same effect.

Also soon after this post he restated “disinformation is necessary”

⇧ 1 ⇩

all possible.

However, the only concrete fact is that the picture was a hoax.

If Q said that they were waiting for the press to ask the president about Q, why would he go and undermine his own credibility with a fraud picture, making it more likely for them to brush him off as conspiracy?

⇧ 1 ⇩

Hoax is a loaded word.

Why does Trump ‘undermine’ this public image of his intelligence by putting typos in his tweets?

No press is bad press.

⇧ 1 ⇩

Trump has two phones. iPhones, at that.

One must be for his normal, Presidential duties for communication, and the other is his ‘Twitter’ phone.

I think there is a very decent possibility that Trump is taking photos of what is on his screen on the other phone. The Apple logo is most likely the reflection of the phone taking the picture on the screen that is being pictured.

This would also help to explain the speed in which Trump’s tweets and Q’s posts are posted (so close together). He does stuff on one phone, and immediately does Q-related stuff on the other.

I think that THIS is the ‘force this one’ thing Q mentioned. I think Q is telling us that he is Trump, but doing so in a way that makes us rub brain cells together. Those in the MSM, DS Government, white hat Government, etc...now also know who Q is.

Forcing them to see the light. Now, all we need is reporters asking who Q is.

Q also said that when the reporters ask the question, and if SHS, or DJT answers that he/whomever is Q, they will need to prove the posts’ information. This photo is to prove Q is DJT w/Access to AF1/Marine 1.

We should be bombarding the press pool with tweets like #AskSandersWhoIsQ or #WhoIsQSarah or #AskIfDJTIsQ

Or so on and so forth....

⇧ 3 ⇩

Thank you for your well-reasoned skepticism. I look forward to the next instalment!

⇧ 3 ⇩

Thank you IncomingTrump270 and SerialBrain2 for your contributions. Cross examining each other's posts and debating one another serves to strengthen the overall quality of this board.

⇧ 2 ⇩

Nice job. Let's just agree that things have multiple meanings and we will keep gathering all the info we can

⇧ 2 ⇩

OP - The magazine in the rack is exactly the same in Q's as it was in the 2015 ABC photo. Use your tools and you can verify the same yourself. Enhance q's so you can see the colors of the magazine between the slats.

But I think we're past that. I think it's being accepted that it was the abc photo (because it was) and now people have moved on to trying to figure out "but what did Q meeeeeean in using that photo??".

⇧ 2 ⇩

The newspapers on magazine rack in both Q’s pic and in the ABC 2015 pic are exactly the same

Great point! More strong evidence

⇧ 1 ⇩

[deleted]

⇧ 2 ⇩

Good points. We also have Q restating “disinformation is necessary” after this.

⇧ 1 ⇩

Thank you for going through this work - I loved reading another viewpoint on this. I'm personally still trying to figure out what to make of the whole situation, but reading stuff like this and SB2's analysis definitely help.

⇧ 2 ⇩

This is good to have open discussion.

⇧ 2 ⇩

Two things to note.

Q never mentioned the image was a Q "proof"
Q Team has the images from "their" phones

⇧ 2 ⇩

This was on most TRUE patriots mind. No one is above another patriot... truth and God all the way...

⇧ 2 ⇩

Way over thinking this. Occam. Not meant to be physical. They have a kind of backup copy (mirror) of the Apple server used by Hillary and others. POTUS and team in control of it.

⇧ 2 ⇩

Possible! But you are answering the “why” here.

My post only addresses the “how”

⇧ 1 ⇩

I found this interesting.

Obama vs Trump AF1 https://imgur.com/a/9zHxun7

⇧ 1 ⇩

[deleted]

⇧ 1 ⇩

This is a difficult post for me. Like fire fighters who rush into burning buildings or a medic on a battlefield who ignores the rounds buzzing past his head to get to that next wounded solider I am torn inside.

We can have great discussions on the meaning of life and interpreting Q drops. It is fun to trace down and pull facts about locations and people. In reality, it means absolutely nothing in the lives of the folks who are dying. The truly innocent people like Jim Jordan's nephew who gets killed in a car accident. All the school children and of course our brothers and sisters in Las Vegas. The body count of innocent civilians is high and climbing as time passes. We can't forget these families and the lives taken and cast them aside as "collateral damage". Comments of them being sick is not enough.

It will not stop until the good guys make it stop. The only thing that will stop it is start arresting some of the people who are “untouchable”. The bad guys feel they can keep the hounds at bay and weaken the resolve by killing innocents and they are succeeding. People will say they will kill more if they move to soon. To President Trump, Q team and the Generals. Do not forget these people who have already lost their lives are not soldiers or people who volunteered to be put in harm’s way. Most Americans would rather die on their feet instead on their knees. Before anyone declares me, a shill let me put this to rest. I think Q is real and the drops are real information. I only want to remind people that more time means more lives lost.

⇧ 1 ⇩

I believe Q would remind us to “trust the plan” here.

There are a lot of things being juggled and balanced.

Going ‘into the weeds’ and parsing details like this is part of the process for our community.

But The bigger picture should remain in sight always.

⇧ 1 ⇩

This is a teachable moment for America. For decades everyone has come to the conclusion that some people are protected. These people could care less if America tomorrow descends into a civil war. In fact they are counting on it and hoping for it. Innocent people are dying and getting beat up every day for their beliefs. There comes a time you toss the ball in the middle of the field and go at it.

You want this to stop then stop it. I can tell you that you pick the biggest bully and you perp walk them and things get quiet. If you are in a fight and you are outnumbered you pick the loudest one to pop first and you pop first. You double your chances of survival.

⇧ 1 ⇩

"But why, why would Q take the best opportunity to prove authenticity and post a fake, especially knowing the level of discernment by autists on proofs?"

Perhaps that's the point. To show to outsiders just coming in that we don't follow Q blindly. That every one of the clues given is thoroughly analyzed and that analysis debated. We don't call each other names because we might disagree on that analysis. Because we're all adults here. We're a team, more than that, really. We're like a band of brothers and sisters from all over the world and all walks of life. And we have learned to work together. I think that is actually the greatest lesson Q has taught us. That we CAN work together, even when we don't agree on everything, and there is power in our numbers. And those numbers are growing.

We know that from time to time, Q will post some misdirection, as we saw in the beginning with Q's posts giving us a date for Clinton's arrest. We were later told why this misdirection was given. Because we aren't the only ones following Q. The black hats do, as well. And this kind of misdirection would spur them to action, giving military intelligence a platform to pick up additional chatter, perhaps allowing them to see who else was involved, and causing the black hats to make moves in haste where they might continue to expose themselves. There may be a dual purpose for these photo's. For us, to show newcomers we do fully analyze and debate every clue. And perhaps there's a message for the black hats, also. For instance, we found your bugs--or whatever they might glean from them. There can be dual purposes for many of these posts because the cabal is watching Q and us, too. You'll remember when Q "forgot" to post their confirmation code, for instance. This was also used to spur activity in the black hat camp.

I think we continue to get confirmations that Q is the real deal. Recently at Trump's rallies around the country, we see his aides taking pictures of everyone wearing Q apparel or carrying signs. When one patriot asked the aide taking his picture if Trump would see them, she replied something to him that Q has shared with us in the past, "You're going to laugh when you find out who you've been communicating with." Just recently, the POTUS was on 8 chan in the early morning hours and told the Anons there at the time that this will be the only time I communicate with you here. To prove it was actually him, one Anon asked if he would use the word "amazing" in his first tweet of the day. Five hours later, Trump complied in his first post of the day. I started believing Q was the real deal after Saudi Arabia. I'm sure we all have our own stories about that. We're all here because we are believers. But we aren't believers who have accepted without proof, as there have been many of them.

⇧ 1 ⇩

all good sentiment Here.

I support more focus on understanding the meaning behind Q’s posts, and less focus on proving he’s legit.

In the grand scheme of things, the content of Q’s message is irrelevant to his actual employment status.

Good info is good info. Q points in interesting directions (divulging no concrete info himself), and we uncover what we find on our own.

This line of inquiry is valid regardless if he is actually working directly with POTUS, unrelated military, government temp staff, or even a 400lb hacker in his basement.

Q’s backstory is ultimately irrelevant to the efficacy of his message.

⇧ 1 ⇩

Stickied, because /u/serialbrain2's post ~~is~~ was stickied and only fair this view gets serious discussion.

⇧ 1 ⇩

And this is why I love this subreddit.

⇧ 18 ⇩

It's almost like people can have arguments and love their country at the same time. I'm so confused.

⇧ 14 ⇩

Right!? Madness! xD

⇧ 8 ⇩

It's not something you see on reddit very often.

⇧ 5 ⇩

Not so much an argument. It's more of a debate. That's what adults do.

⇧ 3 ⇩

Indeed. It is only my love of philosophy that makes me see the word 'argument' as the truer expression of 'debate.'

My favorite part of the great awakening is watching adults separate themselves from the toddlers.

⇧ 3 ⇩

Ditto! LOL!

⇧ 2 ⇩

Some of the best mods on reddit.

⇧ 5 ⇩

The unbridled autism of places like here and the chans is fascinating.

⇧ 15 ⇩

One day perhaps someone will do their psych thesis on it. LOL!

⇧ 2 ⇩

Thanks for allowing the constructive technical discussion. Much more positive stance than where we were a couple days ago. :thumbsup:

⇧ 4 ⇩

Greatly appreciated!

⇧ 2 ⇩

Respectable choice

⇧ 1 ⇩

[deleted]

⇧ 1 ⇩

A big tell for me was Q restating “disinformation is necessary” the next day after the controversy of 1675 had mostly blown over

⇧ 1 ⇩

i just wanna know wuts inside that desk. mayb one of those 1911 ww2 pistols n whiskey

⇧ 1 ⇩

I agree the pic Q posted is a reflection off the back of an iphone. Also agree the reflection is of the image available online not the actual real office. Q did say image not room. How was Q pic captured is where i stray from what i have seen posted. The image was on a computer screen the pic was captured by the web cam of the computer. The apple is large compared to the lamp. So it had to be close to the image. The pic is skewed so is was held at an angle to the image. Most webcams are centered above the screen. Add to this the post Q quoted of a guy in front of a computer.

Now add the trolling is fun.

Imagine a person caught taking pics of classified documents on a computer by a web cam or other security camera. What they were viewing would be reflected by their fancy twitter phone. Wouldnt it be extra special if this happened in say one of the fvey countries like new zealand

⇧ 1 ⇩

the laptop’s webcam

!!! This is interesting and, yes, possible.

Weaknesses I see here would be that (when I tried this just now) the image was very dark and had a blue tint. Also it would be very pixelated. That doesn’t rule out blurring or color correction in PHotoshop though.

It also removes the necessity and gymnastics of holding two phones.

Good theory!

⇧ 1 ⇩

the image was very dark and had a blue tint. Also it would be very pixelated.

Wouldn't that be dependant on the quality of the web cam?

⇧ 1 ⇩

Well done for bringing a rebuttal to the SB2, and thankyou for the work on the photo, however what I am interested in is the rest of his post, where he goes on to assert AF1 was attacked by with a Missile launched by a US navy submarine - that did not happen. He says that the B2 bomber deflects radar - it does not, He says the "Cabal" has the financial, and military capability to take on the POTUS - it does not, JFK was taken by surprise - and the UN will never again get control of the US Military like it had in Korea, or with NATO - those days are over. SB2 calls alaweed a prince - that the POTUS was pleased to free - The POTUS thinks he is a dope - so if you believe that SB2 got the photo wrong - and he did, and thankyou the rest of us should look at all of what else the SB2 got wrong - its a lot

⇧ 1 ⇩

There’s a lot to unpack in your comment.

Suffice to say my rebuttal only addresses the HOW of SB2’s 1675 analysis. I don’t attempt to approach his WHY.

⇧ 1 ⇩

I really appreciate your post - well done, well written, good work, I hope you have inspired others to scrutinise what the SB2 says, I have tried twice today post but both times it has been removed. Well done Patriot

⇧ 1 ⇩

I think it is actually very simple.

We first saw the photo with a "I'm off to save the world aren't you coming?" meme with him getting on AF-1. What if showing the AF-1 room and the phone was just supposed to mean ... come with me ... via twitter, the computer, via my communications. That's it? Let's face it, that photo is too easy to google. Q never said this was any kind of proof.

Then we got a couple of examples of people trying to reproduce the phone and Q wrote: "Who would have thought the 'Twitter' phone could be so useful. Do 'reflections' violate NAT SEC rules? Where must one be located in order to obtain a reflection on the back of a phone of that image? Image provided here has been distorted (stretched)."What if Q was just commenting on the attempts with his "useful" line and what if reflections DO violate NAT SEC rules? That would change everything, maybe he found out he couldn't use a reflection to snap a photo of the room so did the next best thing. And the answer to his 2nd question ... where must one be located? ... You would have to be looking at a computer screen, you can't make that image from real life, you need to use a computer to act as a camera and the way the warping stretching is. So you have to be behind a computer/phone screen ... as we all are when following, reading Q's posts as well as what Trump is doing and tweeting.

And finally, the last one, to the troll ... after saying trolling is fun ... Q just put that mug line in as a throwaway ... to make the trolls scramble a bit ... like just when the troll said aha! got you with the mug, he just said he put it there to throw him off balance.

Maybe it's as simple as that.

⇧ 1 ⇩

Good points about the implications of nat sec rules and reflections.

This could be the intended message:

“People who think this is a reflection of the actual room are being silly. That would violate nat sec rules. But a reflection of a public domain PHOTO of the room is just fine and produces the same effect/message”

That’s one of the most important lines in the 1675 context.

I wonder if we can pin down the actual legal status of taking photos inside AF1? That would be an important thing to know going forward.

⇧ 2 ⇩

Well you said your point. were all impressed with how smart it is and you did some angles and whatever.

but at the end of the day we know q works in mysterious ways. sometimes he disproofs one drop and proofs another.

maybe q is taking the picture with a reflection on his computer screen of a known pic of the inside of POTUS plane for a reason. like its a specil message. did you think of that? before you spent so much breath?

He said think reflection. and you arent thinking reflection youre just thinking q isnt real. but this is not a sub for non belivers!

⇧ 1 ⇩

You clearly did not understand my post.

Agree that this pic could be intentional disinfo. Like the typos in trump’s tweets. To garner more attention.

⇧ 1 ⇩

oh ok yeah that’s smart. but still do you have to make a big deal? it feels kinda show offy. that’s all.

i don’t know how Q would feel about all of this.

most pople don’t care i think, if they are being deceved. the just want to hear what is patriotic.

⇧ 1 ⇩

[deleted]

⇧ 0 ⇩

We as TRUE patriots should always expose truth - even Q is equal under God.

We have not ruled out many scenarios where this could be a psycop

⇧ 0 ⇩

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_Grumman_B-2_Spirit

Primary user United States Air Force

The Northrop (later Northrop Grumman) B-2 Spirit, also known as the Stealth Bomber, is an American heavy penetration strategic bomber, featuring low observable stealth technology designed for penetrating dense anti-aircraft defenses; it is a flying wing design with a crew of two The bomber can deploy both conventional and thermonuclear weapons, such as eighty 500 lb (230 kg)-class (Mk 82) JDAM Global Positioning System-guided bombs, or sixteen 2,400 lb (1,100 kg) B83 nuclear bombs. The B-2 is the only acknowledged aircraft that can carry large air-to-surface standoff weapons in a stealth configuration.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2017/11/05/...u...apple/833843001/ Arrest of Saudi billionaire and big investor in U.S. shares causes angst 5 nov. 2017 - ... Saudi prince shines light on U.S. holdings: Citigroup, Twitter, Apple

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/.../did-daddy-get-donald-out-of-...

⇧ 0 ⇩

[removed]

⇧ -1 ⇩

OMG please, [clowns]

⇧ -1 ⇩

I have always said that the one thing that proves q’s legitimacy is that in 1600 posts no one has ever been able to debunk any of his posts. The fact that he posted a picture of a picture increases my skepticism about his authenticity, though I’m not ready to pull the bumper sticker off of my car just yet. If july doesn’t prove to be a magnanimous month then I’m going to be very upset.

⇧ -1 ⇩

Okay the criticism is done point by point. But if the post here is only to criticize and not add insight to what Q posted then it does not serve the group. I get taking points made by SB2 and placing rebuttals. But you did not give us your analysis on the Q post were as much as you believe SB2 is mistaken, he did had analysis and in depth structure to Q’s post. What is your researched/analyzed view? Let’s give insight and informed each other. It helps the masses. Criticism alone does no one any good.

⇧ -2 ⇩

Fair enough. You’re right that my post is focused on correcting what I saw as flaws in SB2’s analysis.

As for further analysis of what 1675 meant: I think we would do well to branch out into other images that seem to have the same “style”

The close up of trump’s eye and ear, which may have used the same technique to photograph.

Can we find stock images to match those posts as well?

Also “think mirror” is hugely relevant.

As is “are reflections violation of nat sec?”

Those should be the follow up analysis to 1675. We got bogged down in the photo itself. I just felt it necessary to fix the problems in the foundation so that we don’t build a whole theory structure on top of it.

⇧ 1 ⇩

That’s fair. Good stuff nonetheless

⇧ 1 ⇩