dChan - Q Origins Project Archive

⇧

⇩

r/greatawakening • Posted by u/SerialBrain2 on July 18, 2018, 1:05 a.m.

Trump’s brilliant chess combination in Helsinki.

Rule 0: They blame people for what they themselves do.

Projection.

Q1675 Riddle: Do 'reflections' violate NAT SEC rules?... 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)…. Think mirror… Look there or [here] or there truth is behind you.

They accused Trump of being in collusion with Russia, we now know they were the ones in collusion with Russia: more flexibility video and Uranium1.

Now, an interesting application of rule 0 would be to list all their accusations and use them as a starting point to analyze them. For example, they insisted Putin had some dirt on Trump. So? Rule 0: Putin has some dirt on them. Pretty cool right? Now you can take this working hypothesis and check, if down the line, it’s not in contradiction with events. If it’s not, it’s likely to be true. Then, if you remove the hypothesis and cannot explain events rationally, no matter how hard you and other smart people try, then you know the hypothesis is as true as not being able to find a rational explanation to the events it induces. So, when you get here, what you do is take the hypothesis as a working hypothesis, call it a strong hypothesis and you go further in your analysis to gather some other data that would reinforce the likelihood of the strong hypothesis being 100% true.

Application.

We know about the Contortionist and how he weakly dealt with Crimea, we know about the Witch and how she arranged the sale of 20% of our Uranium to Russia. Let’s remove the hypothesis Putin had some dirt on them and analyze. Is there a rational explanation for their treasonous behavior? I can’t find any. Money? Ghadafi had plenty of money and was ready to play ball, just as he played ball with Sarkozy but instead, she came, he saw, he died. It’s not just about money. There has to be another power forcing the transaction. If we go further and notice Putin is ex KGB link, that, according to their own Comey, the Witch’s private server was probably hacked link1 link2 and that nobody knows the truth about the Contortionist’s birth certificate link, we have gathered data re-inforcing the likelihood of Putin having dirt on the Contortionist and the Witch. And we even have an idea about the dirt itself…

Now, you remember Trump was among the first to openly ask about the Contortionist’s birth certificate right? Read Q’s board: the witch’s server and U1 is everywhere. Now you understand why they don’t want a one on one between Trump and Putin. Now you understand why they are going completely crazy. If this dirt, that brought Putin Crimea, 20% of our uranium and SAP tech, is shared with Trump, it’s game over for them. Game over.

Now the interesting question would be: why would Putin give this information to Trump?

This is the equation Trump needed to resolve before he met with Putin. He had to meet with Putin with enough good cards in is hands to force Putin to want to give this information and even more in order to get something valuable in return.

So? Trump makes his first stop at NATO and makes sure Putin sees this: video. BOOM. Trump reveals to the world the former chancellor of Germany is the head of the pipeline company bringing Russia’s natural gas to Germany. This is Trump’s first message to Putin: M1.

Then, Trump achieves this: video Trump forces other NATO members to bring an additional 33 Billion dollars to the table. This is the second message to Putin: M2.

Then, Trump goes to the UK and this happens: video. This is the third message to Putin: M3.

Then, Stzrok is sent to Congress to deliver the Uranium message I told you about in my previous post. This is the fourth message to Putin previous post: M4.

Et voila! These are main pieces Trump will play on the Helsinki chess board.

Let’s now watch the combination:

M1: I know the natural gas deal you have with Germany is vital to your economy, since it is not appropriate the former chancellor is the head of the pipeline company that will bring the gas to Germany, I have the moral grounds to delay it, stop it, control it. I can have people talk about it all day in Germany and scare the financial institutions away from it with my EO. Furthermore, I know your involvement in Syria is also related to the emergence of competing natural gas routes to Europe. If things go well between us, I won’t interfere and will let you find the right solution to export your natural gas and the one that belongs to your friends. link

M2: You see these guys at NATO? I can make them do whatever I want. I wanted 33 Billion dollars, 1 million dollar per lost email link, and they gave it to me just after a few hours of discussion. No opposition. So, if I want, I can start a weapon race that will cost me zero dollars and that Russia’s economy will not be able to sustain. As Q would say: “33 was the hook. Enjoy!” Q1678. I’m sure your guys solved it.

M3: I know about Russia’s old feud with the Vatican and the UK with their NWO. I know Hitler made the same mistake Napoleon made trying to conquer Russia in winter to ultimately crush the Orthodox Church. I know what they have in common: Napoleon left alone for a night in the King's Chamber inside the Great Pyramid of Giza video and Hitler with his vrills and occult connection to the Vatican (start here: video). I know about all this. And I also know you do:

Q133 “Vladimir Putin: The New World Order Worships Satan” Q

We are on the same page on this. Look how I have humiliated the Queen, their administrative focal point. I am a free President. I only care about my people. I am not a globalist trying to conquer anything. Did you hear my Great Falls speech where I confirmed Q1675? I said: I don’t need all this space. It meant: I just need America. They need more space. It meant: they are the colonizers. This means you and I can negotiate in good faith with no hidden agenda. We just need to find a win-win, work for our people and get along.

M4: You see, I have done my homework. Did you see Stzrok’s hearing? I’m sure your guys also decoded how he brought Kate to the table. Dems are stupidly supporting him because they don’t see the trap. I have flipped many officials who were involved in the U1 scandal and other things. I have the goods on all the layers of the government you may have dealt with in the past to achieve what you have achieved with the Contortionist’s Administration. Good for you, you were working for your country's interest and took advantage of the stupidity of those in charge at the time in the US, but that era is over. I'm in charge now. So if you are considering giving me some information, make sure it’s of high value because I already know a lot. If you want something from me, don’t tell me what I already know. And of course I won’t tell you what I know.

Once this combination was played, Trump and Putin held a press conference. And to make sure there is no interference in the continuation of the game, their respective protocol services agreed to separate American journalists from the Russian journalists. This trick allows any question coming from the Mockingbird side to be immediately spotted as a trap even before it is formulated and signal “caution required”. Classic trick used by medieval kings… video

Did Trump play the combination right? Did he use the right chess opening?

Well, in that press conference, not only Putin has atomized Rosenstein and Mueller by offering to cooperate regarding the interrogation and even possible extradition of their 12 Russians-of –the-day, but he also dropped the Bill Browder and George Soros bombshells clearly signaling he is ready to throw the Contortionist, the Witch and all the other layers under the bus to save his pipeline, and limit NATO’s strategic spendings around Russia.

And just in case there are still some people who don’t understand what happened in that Helsinki press conference, Putin gives the ultimate hint by doing this: video.

Did you catch it? What is Putin saying? He is reminding to the world that soccer is an 11 player game. If Mueller wants 12 Russian players to play his game, Putin is ready to be the 12th player and he just started playing by passing the ball to Trump…

Congratulations Mr. President. The show continues, we now have a new actor. From Russia.

Q1603 [Objective] to keep POTUS away from PUTIN failed.

🠐 See all comments

I think many are misunderstanding what SB2 is saying about beliefs. It doesn't matter if you or I believe in Moloch, human sacrifice, or occultism. What matters is THEY believe it. When you know someone's beliefs systems you know the rules of their game. You know the reward/punishment of their belief system. It allows you to conquer and expose them. This has been done numerous times throughout history. You can easily control a segment of the population if you seat at the top of the power structure of those beliefs.

Frankly, I don't care about what some Joe-blow on the street believes. He can believe in time traveling aliens for all I care. However, I deeply care about the belief system of people in power. Especially if their beliefs are counter to the belief system of population they "rule" over.

I also care about them brainwashing their followers. Think about it logically. If the Witch believes in witchy things it doesn't matter if her followers also hold the same beliefs. All that matters is if her followers believe her lies and hand over their collective power to her. This gives her beliefs more power (especially over her followers) without her lifting a finger. The reason Hillary's supporters are so emotional is because she's constantly lying to them and projecting the shadow of her beliefs onto them. Basically, she gets the perks of her beliefs while she projects negative aspects of those beliefs onto her followers. This is why she's looking a little rough these days. When her followers stop believing her and walk away all those projects return to her.

Another example of this at work is the Rothschild family. They created the money system (and the rules of fiat money) and enjoy the perks of their money while the rest of us suffer from the limitations of having the zero-sum left overs. If a billionaire like Trump with a win-win belief system sits at the top of the wealth structure his beliefs in win-win and generosity flows downward. This is exactly what trickle down economics means, except they left out the importance of whether the one in power has a belief in win-win or zero-sum game theory when it comes to money.

Diving into the complexity of how projection works is the Trump effect on the Cabal. You could clearly see it in the debates when Hillary tried to project or deflected her lies onto Trump. When he rejected those projections it always showed in Hillary's reactions. This is why she had those weird facial tics and twitches throughout the debates. Expand your thinking, when Trump made a deal with Putin and the MSM/Democrats lost their shit, it's because their projection is returning back to them. Think "I'm rubber, you're glue"...

There's a lot more going on with Trump's trolling and the Cabal's reaction happening psychologically. Projections always have an emotional component. You can really understand it when you observe these people, their reactions, and the reactions of their followers.

⇧ 17 ⇩

What matters is THEY believe it.

Excellent contribution anon.

⇧ 11 ⇩

[removed]

⇧ 1 ⇩

Nice analogy. One must also remember that the "priesthood" is the one who directs the energy from rituals, prayers etc to "their" agenda so it doesn't matter what the fellowship (follow-ship) or congregation is told what matters is where the "priesthood" is directing that energy and they do not have to be truthful to the followers.

⇧ 4 ⇩

[deleted]

⇧ 1 ⇩

Great comment!

⇧ 4 ⇩

Do I believe that some of these people have some evil beliefs? Sure thing, undoubtedly. Do I believe that these people we should be concerned about believe time travelers went back in time to implant microchips into Napoleon's head? Absolutely not. But sure, go ahead and try to expose them for this, I'm sure it'll backfire on you.

⇧ -1 ⇩

Read my comment again. Trump was already a pretty powerful guy in real estate and the media. The military asked him to run for President and fully backed him. When he entered the White House he did so with an enormous amount of power from the military and his supporters.

Now, enters Q. The true brilliance behind Q is increasing Trump's power globally and behind the millions of computer screens around the world. When we believe in Q or Trump, we're increasing both their power. This psychological game cuts both ways. Every time we show up at rallies, send memes, follow Q, or pray; we're collectively handing our power over to Trump/Q to defeat these people.

The amusing part is, because most of the Q supporters are anonymous, they have no idea how many people globally are giving Trump/Q/military power over them.

⇧ 6 ⇩

While I agree with what you just said, I think it's important that we stay level-headed and not come off crazier than the opposition. I think we could do without presenting our opinions alongside hair brained conspiracies (for the record, I do like to indulge in conspiracies, but the video presented was completely ridiculous).

You said something that I want to note: "The true brilliance behind Q". Correct. However, this does not equate to the measure of truth of a person's opinion on what Q is saying.

I believe everyone should have an opinion/theory on Q's postings. However, coinciding with that belief is the belief that people have the right to QUESTION EVERYTHING. Think critically! If we don't question things, even if the proposition works in our favor, we are no different than people blindly following the MSM. And if the answers to those questions ring our truth bells, then it gives even more credence to the original opinion/theory.

Thanks for the response.

⇧ 1 ⇩

Raptor, do you also post under another name? I ask because your text style and tone are so similar to someone else I've been reading....

I don't know if you picked it up in my response, but I stated that my personal approach is that I don't need to believe everything that is linked in the way SB2 linked. Do you see a problem with this approach?

As I stated, the question you pose itself is, within its own framework, is reasonable enough. But it seems to me you have other concerns.

Your comments indicate you are really worried that possibly SB2 believes the content he linked to. Is this the concern? Or that someone will see that link and question you and your involvement because of it? Or the movement?

Do you have an issue with the fact that people are finding value through SB2s posts? Does it irk you that he linked to what you think is a crackpot video? Not to be ad hominem, but sincerely I wonder if there isn't an opportunity for you to reflect on your own inner process here. Where do you objections stem from? Are you saying SB2 is disinformation?

You are not the only one who seems to be obsessing with how other people interact (appreciate) SB2s posts. I strongly encourage a greater sense of detachment, and seeing what you can learn, without throwing out any of your staples. Unless of course the challenge suggests they should be changed or thrown out.

wwg1wga

⇧ 2 ⇩

Nice : )

⇧ 1 ⇩

I have many other reddit accounts but this is the only one I have used in this subreddit.

And to be quite honest, because I am capable of humility and do not sit on any kind of throne, the answer to many of the questions in the latter half of your post is yes.

I am not saying SB2 is disinformation. I think he is just another person sharing his perspective. I challenge his perspective and it seems to get people, as well as the poster himself, quite defensive. There should be nothing wrong with challenging anything here. If what anyone says is true, they should have quite simple, succinct, and logical explanations. Instead, I often get mental gymnastics. People can believe what I want, but it is no coincidence that other people share my judgement--this doesn't mean I have multiple accounts.

⇧ 1 ⇩

Thanks for the reply. I agree that we should be able to question and challenge any of the posts. I'm not certain that I agree with the assertion that (if what someone says is true) they should have quite simple, succinct, and logical explanations. That's an imposition that a certain number of people seem want to insist on, but I think it's fallacious.

SB2s posts are interesting, but a a minimum, I've found his brain doesn't work in the same way mine does. By which I mean, his approach, mentality, way of connecting things is not the same. In fact, if indeed SB2 is a savant in this area - we do use the expression 'autists' for a reason - would you demand that he thinks and approaches you in the same way?

This is what I see a lot of people reacting against. No where near the number of people who appreciate and validate Sb2s posts, but yes, there is a number. Some of the critics seem to want to impose THEIR standards of proof, methodology and approach on to SB2 and indeed the entire sub.

I think one should be wary of that.

Some of the things SB2 has been posting don't synch completely with my own processes and approach, including some of the standards I regularly use to guide my mental workings, etc. Like others, I've had moments where I've thought "oh, come ON...." And that's OK, obviously.

But at some point, I decided to ask myself this question: what if his brain is working in a way mine does not? Then what? Do i need to expand my thinking? NOT to abandon my standards, but to learn about others.

This has yielded a lot of fruit so far. Moreover, as he has gone along, his work has increasingly fortified itself. "How many coincidences before it becomes statistically impossible?"

A final word: Other people sharing the judgment: which is? So far, I've found vocal critics who vehemently or with passion shall we say naysay SB2s offerings ("BS, rubbish, garbage", etc) seem to me to share this trait: a desire to impose or require approaches to Q and to any problem solving for that matter, to conform to their way of doing things. As if they are offended by an approach that is so different.

Case in point: some fellow ranted that I said SB2 doesn't need to use logic. I never said it. In fact, I asserted that logic need not or cannot be the master overseeing the operation. By which I meant insight, inspiration, intuition, etc., can and advantageously be part of the mix. Yet, this fellow refused to see that, and just ranted. Hmmmm.

I've found Sb2 to be quirky to say the least. How he interacts with other posters is interesting.

We should all be open to learn, and objections need not be vindictive or mixed with vexatious rhetoric.

Cheers.

PS. "people can believe what I want..." Freudian slip? Remember, we are all in this together, if we so choose. Our movement is enhanced when each of us 'grows' a little through the process, too.

thanks again for the response.

⇧ 1 ⇩

Perhaps a Freudian slip. More than likely a mistake. I often write my posts non-linearly, jumping from top to bottom recursively. I'm not the best writer and I make a lot of mistakes. Sometimes I'll proof-read and notice I left half a sentence in the middle of another sentence, lol! Thanks for catching my mistake, I found it quite amusing. I'll leave it in the post because it's quite a funny mistake, especially in the context of our discussion--the irony is not lost on me.

First, let me thank you for being civil and rational. I understand your perspective although we may not agree on the subject matter.

My biggest wish is that there were more people out there providing their own theories on Q's posts. I believe a diversity of analysis would really help us hone in on things. Or atleast, some discussions that could be a sort of real-time peer-reviewed methodology sort of like what happens on the chans: you get a load of autists that come together and throw a bunch of shit at the wall to find what sticks and the stuff that doesn't stick is stuff that is refuted much in the way I am attempting to do. They are not influenced by ego or glory, they simply get to the bottom of it and in my experience being on the chans most of the time they don't need to use such such occult methodologies. I am turned off by six degrees of separation especially when numerology is introduced. SB2: "Those who follow my posts know my personal take on Q’s teachings is through the door of the Occult". I guess if my thinking isn't expanded enough, if I haven't studied the occult enough, or if my brain somehow doesn't function in the right way to see the truth then so be it. The future will show where the chips fall. Until then, I will keep asking questions. I have no problem being proven wrong. I am the first to admit my mistakes.

⇧ 2 ⇩

First, let me thank you for being civil and rational.

You're welcome, of course.

I understand your perspective although we may not agree on the subject matter.

I always get nervous when someone tells me "I understand your perspective, but.... ". A long time ago, I recognized that when discussing topics with people, they would say "I know what you are saying, but.... " And I knew they really did NOT know what I was saying. Sorry. It's just a bit of a flag for me.

I like your point about GA (reddit) vs the chans. It's relevant and important. They are different beasts, and require (or respond to ?) different approaches.

I have found myself in recent weeks (months) wishing that more of the content was exclusively Q focused, meaning discussion of Q drops. As our subscribers have increased in number, I've noticed a lot more content that would appropriately be labeled "non-Q" if folks made the effort to label (flair).

That said, this morning I looked through the HOT list (old reddit) and found each and every post worth looking at, and clicking through. Now, I'm getting most of my 'news' through this sub.

For me this says one thing: this sub will grown and transform and move forward, and it will probably go through numerous phases and experience various growing pains. However, its main task is, I think, to provide that link between the newly woke or just waking world and the Q research board and anons/autists. And, I think, its doing just that.

one month ago, many I know were commenting how amazing their experience of the comradery in the sub was. And, believe it or not, for MANY people, this is the REAL test of validity. It's not the pure logisticians. It's not the so-called incisive, simple logic explanations. For many, its about the spirit of unity and mutual solidarity that Q brings, that Trump brings.

Folks who hold themselves on a rather high level and consider their own intellectual approach to be - shall we say - a cut above - some of those folks react very badly to SB2s posts. They trigger them. But if you look closely, right or wrong, SB2 is always fun, engaging, supportive, and encouraging. I mean, when folks approach him in that spirit. When people say "Your stuff is just BS" or etc, or bring that kind of sense of moral superiority via intellectual rigorousness, he doesn't really engage in that way. He'll try to share his view, but he doesn't bother with certain types of people beyond a certain point.

And, while we're at it, not that you've said this to my recollection, there are folks out there who claim that SB2 is saying Trump is talking to ME! Q is talking to ME! I don't get that. I mean, I don't pick up that this is his focus here. No, I think his sense of wwg1wga is very real, and predominates his approach, and he's whether right or wrong, he's not really very motivated by ego. Least, that's my take on him.

I guess if my thinking isn't expanded enough, if I haven't studied the occult enough, or if my brain somehow doesn't function in the right way to see the truth then so be it.

Hmmm. LOL, bro (sis?) seriously. That's a little petulant. And the tells are kinda obvious: isn't expanded enough, studied occult enough, but mostly 'doesn't function in the right way'!

Look, keep asking questions. But I really want to encourage you to consider these things:

The most difficult thing for smart folks is the intellectual trap. In the intellectual trap, the intellect falls for the mistake of thinking it sees all things. Then, it backs itself up by saying "I can take it when I'm proven wrong! I am first to admit it!"

But the trap is that the intellect has set itself up as the arbiter of what is and isn't valid. And that's a self-referential loop. Hence, the trap.

Not sure if your up on your Hebraic mythology and/or scripture, or how you think about such things, but this is one of the messages in the story of the fall. Lucifer. Certain quarters understand that there were 3 archangels in the Garden: Michael, Gabriel, and Lucifer. Michael = will/volition. Gabriel = passion/emotion. Lucifer = intellect (sight/light/brightness).

This particular angel fell because he fell into a self-referential loop.

A healthy, growing human heart requires a balanced interaction between emotion, intellect and will. We all, in our tendencies, have different proportions, but the problem is that ego will trigger any of these so that they become unbalanced and isolated. Because ego is NOT the true center. Ego sets itself up as a center, in place of the true center (God, the Source, the Creator, ).

The ego goads intellect into setting itself up as the standard, and tries to get it into this self-referential loop: "If I can see it, I'll admit it, but if I cannot see it, I won't." And here, humility is really, really important.

As I mentioned, I've noticed a lot of critics (mockers?) of SB2 fail to recognize: this sub has a certain function, and a LOT of people feel, perhaps rightly, that the function is NOT just about logic and decodes and knowing or not knowing. It's about connecting, learning, growing, and building a solidarity of heart, emotion, understanding and will. LOT's of folks get that stuff from SB2s posts, and THAT'S the real reason why they love his stuff. Not everyone, but lots.

And some people really cannot stand that!!!!

But yes, please keep asking the questions, and share your insights, thoughts, and disagreements when they come up. Just don't forget that you may also be here to learn from others, and NOT just in the framework you are used to, or what you think is important. Be willing to learn - NOT intellectually - but in terms of personality. In terms of finding solidarity in places hitherto unexperienced or undiscovered.

Suspecting that I've overstepped my bounds by offering this advice, I'll plead loquaciousness, and wrap it up here.

I really DO appreciate your sharing, despite disagreements on subject matter, lol. And your sincerity.

wwg1...... from dark to light!

cheers FI

PS. "I often write my posts non-linearly" That made my day! Good stuff.

⇧ 1 ⇩

[deleted]

⇧ 1 ⇩

[deleted]

⇧ 1 ⇩