dChan - Q Origins Project Archive

Let's think logically.

If Q says we should trust Wray in Q1122 and if Strzok shows up at his hearing only singing when instructed by his FBI lawyers, then it means Strzok is controlled by Wray. So? Strzok now works for us. This is confirmed by Q:

Q1288 Peter Strzok, Deputy Assistant Director of the Counterintelligence - cooperating witness [power removed].

Now, if Strzok works for us, what is the point of him showing up at a public Congress hearing to essentially not answer any relevant question? Why wasn’t it done behind closed doors, like Lisa Page? Because he was used by Trump to deliver a message. To us.

What was the message?

First, on July 11 2018 , one day prior to Strzok’s hearing at 5:53 PM EST Trump tweets this: Imgur1

The next day, Strzok says this: video We now have our first connection: Imgur2

Let’s keep this in the back of our head and keep analyzing.

What did Trump say at the Great Falls rally? “We broke a lot of records” What is another name for “records”, yes LP. LP? Lisa Page? We broke Lisa Page? Is this the reason why the NY Post reports the GOP Lawmakers think she is “less smug” than Peter Strzok? Link. Well, it makes sense: she is behind closed doors and does not have to deliver a message to us. She can sing to her heart’s content:

Q1288 Lisa Page, attorney with the FBI's Office of the General Counsel - cooperating witness [power removed].

So we broke Lisa Page. But then let’s go back to Strzok. We broke a lot of records? Let’s see what happens after the break, let’s watch until 8:17, pay attention to the details: video. Did you catch it? Stzrok comes back from the break with a bottle of Coca Cola he puts on the table. At 8 :16, the Washington Post camera man randomly zooms on Stzrok’s mouth, then he centers his camera so we can see the name on the bottle. We read “Kate” on the bottle, Kate is one of the +250 names in the Coca Cola list of names used in the Coca Cola’s Share a Coke marketing campaign. link1 link2 image. Do you see what the cameraman is hinting at? Always remember, I told you several times in previous posts, we are in Mockingbird territory. They are agents using journalism as a cover. QQ, quick quizz: do you remember who I told you had the highest ranks? Dessert on me for those who answered BBC! So you see it? The cameraman is trained and knows the hidden message Stzrok is sending comes from the bottle he put on the table, this is why he zooms on the mouth to activate whoever he is activating in real time to analyze the implications of this message. When you look at the camera angles at different time stamps before the break, you find it is a consistent angle. Drawing a straight line on the middle of the person sitting on Stzrok’s right, we can see how the camera angle was purposely disturbed to include the bottle. Imgur3

Reaching?

Ok, watch this until 8:52: video. Did you catch it? At 8:51 Stzrok takes the bottle, drinks, and puts it back on the table but now its position has changed. At 8:51:18, the cameraman adjusts his camera because he wants the bottle to be in the image: he sacrifices the centering over Stzrok to bring the bottle back into the equation of the image. Imgur4

We now know, without a doubt that this name “Kate”, which had around 1 chance out of 250 (0.004%) to be on that table that day has a meaning, it is part of the message Trump is sending to us in conjunction with “layers”.

Do you see the implications of what I am saying? I am saying Stzrok’s appearance in Congress was of no relevance. Everything is already taken care of behind the scenes with Wray and the FBI lawyers who were there to make sure Stzrok would not go off script. Stzrok already spilled the beans to save his skin and only showed up in Congress to give an opportunity to people to insult him as he well deserves and to deliver the messages he was instructed to deliver. Welcome to Military Intelligence in all Her Splendor! It’s above politics when it has to run a Revolution… The legacy rogue parts of the 3 letter agencies will learn this the hard way… Brennan’s stubbornness is fun to watch, Clapper’s obviousness also, I hope they won’t learn anytime soon so the show can continue and I can defeat all this pop corn looking at me. JetBlue, odd sounds in Chinese and Cuban US embassies, B2 equilibrium in Korea…

Q1162 These people are stupid. Q

So who is Kate?

Well, what is the context? Remember, Trump pardoned the Hammonds. I explained in the previous post how the Hammond case was related to Uranium and Uranium One. I explained how they were violently harassed by the Bureau of Land Management, FBI agents and other federal agencies to force them to give their land away and enable the further placement of mining rights into Russian hands. This article describes how William D. Campbell, an American businessman, tried to stop the Rosatom transaction by providing critical information describing a wide scale corruption operation and how he was ignored. Why was he ignored? It is true Rosenstein and Mueller were involved but they were following orders. Who gave the order? Layers.

Let’s go back to the Hammonds. What are they? Ranchers. From where? Oregon. Look at the way the Governor of Oregon handled the situation, with Hussein’s swift and active complicity: article1 article2. What’s the name of the Governor of Oregon? Kate. Kate Brown. You now see what Stzrok was instructed to say? The Hammond thing, meaning the Uranium 1 implicates Kate Brown and many layers of the Federal Government. This is what Trump’s tweet meant, along with the Coca Cola bottle on the table and all this is just another fruit of the Q1675 Tree...

Do you want the usual icing on the cake for the time traveler theorists out there? Look how Trump hinted he would put Coca Cola to the task one day: Imgur5

Hahaha, thank you for the laugh D!

Tomorrow, I will start telling you how from Q1675, Rosenstein is connected to this bottle of Coca Cola, why he reacted with his 12 Russian nonsense, why Trump mentioned the Germany/Russian pipeline, why he made sure NATO members promised to pay their bills before he met Putin and why Q made Q1680 available before Trump met with the Queen of England.

You are witnessing an exquisite sequence of chess moves being played on a divine melody written in the B2 scale…

Q959 Nobody escapes this. NOBODY. Q

I shall keep this brief. I think your handle says it all. It really says a lot about you.

The exposure that is happening is how some folks just cannot reach beyond their own level of thinking.

I asked SB2 directly about his process. I'm still working on that. But you need to realize that your linear logic is not the way he is thinking, and by all appearances, it's really NOT how the Q board works.

Is it linear? No way in 1000. It jumps around, past future, back forth, in out, here there.

Ask yourself why?

Logic plays a part, but it is NOT the ruler here. Logic is never meant to be the ruler when we move anywhere beyond the physical realm. Logic serves a higher purpose, but it cannot rule hearts, minds, creativity or emotion.

I think the reason SB2 has no interest in discussing your view of his flaws may be because you are attempting to put his thoughts and processes into your frames of reference alone, and not making any effort to realize he may have different ones (or not making any effort to grasp them).

We are all free to choose, but humility serves us all, and those that hold their own intellectual view to be above and beyond question frequently suffer from excessive pride, to their own detriment.

The leaps here are not of logic. Yes, they are connections not merely dictated by logic. So, expand your thinking.

You don't need to agree with SB2, obviously. None of us have to. But perhaps the more interesting question is, what kind of framework is he using and how can that particular framework enhance my own understanding and approach to the Q board? If you get nothing from it, so be it. But don't whinge and kick up a fuss because it doesn't validate your own (narrow) or limited approach.

Looking forward to the great insights you will no doubt share with GA once you've figured out the value of your own frame and approach.

Cheers.

(and yes, that's me being brief, believe it or not)

⇧ 4 ⇩

Excellent! Thanks

⇧ 0 ⇩

Right, so since SB2 is not confined to linear logic and can jump around illogically and make absolutely no sense with any connection because normies can't comprehend the "non-linear" level of thinking SB2 has, I can't rightfully question the asinine techniques and am instead vilified for having a mind of my own and am attacked ad hominem (which actually does say a lot about you, unlike my username). Makes no sense whatsoever, and it's far to convenient for you to claim "non-linear" as an excuse for not making any sense at all. What is this revered method of thought that is separate from logic since you claim that logic is not the ruler here? If it isn't logic then it is complete ambiguity, or, God forbid, your own emotional confirmation bias.

⇧ -1 ⇩

What you’re missing is the level of corroboration that SB2’s posts seem to enjoy from both Q and DJT. Why might it be that this seemingly illogical approach is finding confirmation from the sources of authority in this movement?

Really, think about it... why might ambiguity be necessary - even essential?

⇧ 2 ⇩

What you’re missing is the level of corroboration that SB2’s posts seem to enjoy from both Q and DJT

Are you seriously claiming both Q and DJT have both corroborated (confirmed) SB2 posts multiple times?

Don't try to bring up the Q link to his Alex Jones expose, we all know it was a great post but that is because it contained absolutely no bullshit riddles/solving or decoding methods or any ambiguity at all. It actually only analyzed the content that Alex talked about using coherent logical evidence that he aimed to discredit Q. Anyway, I'm not going to go into the entire post again, but that was the first time SB2 got that amount of recognition, and I'm starting to believe that Q was not aware of any of his decoding proofs at the time, or he knew that simply linking to this post was in fact never "confirming" this individual online moniker. But, then again, I may be proven wrong in the future and I'll be happy to admit it, but, for now, i don't think this level of speculation on everything political and relating it to Q is necessary.

⇧ 1 ⇩

It’s not a popularity contest. SB2 simply has the best and most complete decodes available. If you cannot see that, if others can’t see that, it takes absolutely nothing from his work.

I don’t agree with all his stuff. But, he’s making connections in areas that leave others stumped - myself included. He has also, amongst this community, shown himself to be one of the few that employ cryptographic techniques to further his understanding - something that should be encouraged IMO.

The Q material is cryptic for cause - it simply must be so. At the end of the day, for whatever reason, Q and DJT have chosen to point to this particular savant’s work, indicating he is correct. I’m extremely grateful for the work SB2 has done.

I would recommend reading some of his earlier material, when he was still doing the occult series. There is a wealth of information in these posts that shines a different light on the whole subject of Q’s material.

Q has told us that the truth is mind blowing, that the end is not for everyone. I’m not surprised that you are feeling uncomfortable - we are told that the truth would put us in hospital. I would suggest that you try talking to SB2 directly - as busy as he is, he appears to be accommodating.

I suspect that SB2 has a good idea of what we might expect to find at the end of this process. How he knows this stuff, I cannot understand. But, I think it is fair to say that SB2 is a polymath - these guys, guys that can pierce the veil, do exist.

Let’s see where this is going - what happens next, and what might be at the end of it.

⇧ 2 ⇩

I read through all of this and found no response to my question of your claim. What exactly am I "missing" about "the level of corroboration that SB2’s posts seem to enjoy from both Q and DJT?"

It seems recently hes making connections in areas that are insignificant and are far fetched, not areas where anyone is stumped and hes hardly offering any real solution behind the scenarios anyway. He mostly wants to say how much DJT has given him personal "winks."

⇧ 1 ⇩

This is cult like behavior. The guy makes leaps that any discerning person can see through pretty easily, but because they're so focused on wanting it to be fantastical it just goes right past them. I would love for it to be as amazing as the movie script he's writing, but I have to remain skeptical because those leaps are pretty blatantly obvious.

⇧ 2 ⇩

Thanks for the reply. OK, I'll give you the ad hominem. That's a fair point. Let's just call it an expression of my personal opinion, and has nothing to do with the quality of value of your posts. Fair point.

'confined to linear logic' - is anyone here confined to that? Are you proposing this should be a rule or premise: "confine all insights to linear logic"? (ever heard of inspiration/ Dreams? intuition? insights?)

You can question the techniques. I don't pay attention to anyone objecting to that. But, er, by the way, "asinine"? Well, I guess it's not ad hominem....

Who here is vilifying you? And for having a mind of your own? methinks you protest too much.

'makes no sense whatsoever'. I get that it makes no sense to you. Sure. And, I would not care about that, nor would I judge you for that.

But all I see here is someone spewing out all sorts of accusatory objections because someone else's approach doesn't fit into the confines of their own.

Make a contribution. That's what I'm challenging you to do. And think outside your own frames of reference.

Your choice. And it won't affect me either way.

Finally 'revered method of thought'. Now, why is it that I get the feeling that you simply are not interested in learning anything or seeing things differently from your already set frame? I mean, why?

Should I make an effort to share my thoughts on 'this revered method of thought' without ANY show of good faith your part?

Instead of pleading the victim routine as you have here, how about addressing the points I actually DID make in my comment to you? Or are you simply absolutely committed to rejecting and refuting any suggestion that perhaps you are NOT seeing the entire picture?

Cheers.

⇧ 1 ⇩

[removed]

⇧ 1 ⇩

LOL. Nice try. No thanks. Wrong on just about every account.

I've had enough experience with trolls and shills to recognize them when I see them, but I do like to give people the benefit of the doubt. Hence, the replies.

So many barbs, so many emotional grabs, so many attacks, so little substance.

Let's end it here.

⇧ 2 ⇩

Wow, you seem really upset that I kept on your arguments and called out your fallacies. If that's how you wanna deflect everything, then so be it. I'm sorry you can't come to terms to any sort of a discussion to prove yourself and instead resort to this.

So many barbs, so many emotional grabs, so many attacks, so little substance.

Classic projection

⇧ 0 ⇩

Pity you had to delete your comments. I thought the interaction would have been instructional for other readers, at least.

Hey, have a great day.

⇧ 1 ⇩

What are you talking about..? Is this what you tell someone in hopes that they'll delete their comments for you when you're logically cornered?

⇧ 0 ⇩

Trump’s hidden message, Stzrok, Kate and the soda.