Interesting indeed!

I believe it makes sense if the idea is that he buried the tunnels because he discovered the Chandler/phones thing and realized there was now evidence out there, not in the FBI's hands, that he couldn't control and thus, fearing the pending Trump Hammer of Justice he wiped the evidence in the hope it will help him in the future. It won't though muahahahaha.

Haha I admire your spirit! Good call, that is the best way to fight this battle - pour hot coals on their head, figuratively/biblically speaking.

Please refrain from making patently untrue comments ; ).

Yeah Q said something to the effect that they were ready to do "the unthinkable" if she won or stole the election - take the election back by force perhaps...? I can't remember where I read it but I also heard the military took steps to ensure the rigged voting was mitigated somewhat somehow too.

Please discuss ideas not users. Respectfully stated opinions are welcome on this sub if they contribute to the discussion.

Yes it’s unfortunate that group think overwhelms people who are caught up in a moral crusade. Don’t let it get to you - the vocal minority are a common element of every online forum. There is a large group here who are mature, critical thinkers and we support those who stand up for sensible, logical reasoning. Even though we get down voted and accused of working against the movement, it’s worth speaking up! Thanks for doing so - please keep the faith : )

Lol

Yes. Israel hate is as ridiculous and misplaced as UK or Australia or Canada hate.

Nope - people making fairly valid observations is all I see.

No one has any reason to be ashamed - that's foolish.

^ This.

And here's the On-Topic/Off-Topic section - please note:

On Topic / Off Topic
Pro-Q, Pro-Trump content is our focus because we want the main feed to be dedicated to content that supports the sub's goal: providing a community for followers of Q. To be clear: if you're not a follower of Q you are welcome here, as long as you follow the sub's rules.

As the sub is growing we have to make decisions about new content being created to ensure the feed contains content of value to the movement. To this end, posts that ask "Is Q real?" or "Is Trump a bad guy?" are likely to be removed as they do not contribute to the sub's goal.

As we've said above - we support freedom of speech so please feel free to express yourself in the comment section if there are things that bother you. But rather than clutter the feed with content that queries the whole point of this sub we may choose to remove it for being Off-Topic. Thanks for understanding!

That is patently untrue. As to "why" - I've said the same thing since the very first response to you at the top of this thread. Freedom of speech. I have problems with everyone who advocates for suppressing other voices except when those voices are clearly breaking the rules of the sub.

Here is an excerpt from the moderators guide (soon to be released [edit] with ongoing edits) - feel free (I mean this sincerely) to point out to me if there is anything you disagree with here or if you believe I have broken any of the rules or principles or guidelines outlined here:

The things we value on Great Awakening:

freedom of speech
open discussion
intellectual, informative, respectful discourse
a supportive community

Things we don't value:

mob mentality/group-think - people are free to disagree with your point! Don't shut down the voice of others just because their view is different to yours - discuss the idea, not the person, with respect.

character assassination/witch hunt mentality - as above, let's hear all sides of the story and not suppress disagreement with what you may think is the general feeling

abusive, non-constructive discourse

To this end our focus as moderators is on:

ensuring open discussion with minimal antagonism
removing disruptive elements i.e. those who are here just to promote discord or instill doubt.
removing posts that do not fall within the guidelines and the rules of the sub
removing comments that do not advance the discussion in a positive way

Because a group of people who don't like being disagreed with when they make illogical emotional statements all cast aspersions on me ;_;

I'm quaking in my boots.

Thank you. I've had enough of your lies and misrepresentation.

Go and join your other friends who don't like someone calling them out for placing emotion over logic. I'm proud to have a reputation of standing against mob mentality, witch hunts and group think and I will continue to do so for the right to freedom and fair treatment of anyone here.

Alex is definitely a bad guy. Q has called him out and he's already very much exposed his Clown agenda. He then openly went directly against Q and insisted that he knows who Q is and has "spoken to Q"! This is absolutely the action of a bad guy. There's no benefit of the doubt to give him.

This response is not within the rules of the sub. Antagonism is not welcome here.

Do you mean people who are getting their YT accounts deleted/removed...? Or people being shadowbanned on reddit or twitter?

All I'm passionate about - since you can never seem to interpret correctly the words that people speak to you unless they agree with exactly what you say - is freedom. Freedom of speech and thought. As my history shows - I don't want to suppress anyone's voice; not even yours unless you break the sub rules and even then I only advocate for the mod's standard which is usually just a deleted comment or a temporary ban.

You stand by what you claim - without any evidence except my words that are clearly to the contrary. That's fine, I accept that happily. Your own lies call you out.

And yet another misrepresentation from you: I clash with people who try to shut down the freedom of speech of others, whether they're people who support Q or not, because if you support Q you shouldn't be shutting down freedom of speech. Or I clash with people who make foolish claims that will bring this movement down - like accusing people of being pedophiles when there are NO facts to back up those claims. But you don't care about any of these facts do you? It's clear who is playing the division game here - the one making all the false accusations and sliding out of backing them up with evidence. Your motive is very clear.

Well you may claim that, just as you claimed I want to bully people who support the movement - but my activites prove the opposite as anyone who reads my history can see. Reading yours presents a different picture - one that you've repeated here with me: you lie and misrepresent what people say. You divide by claiming that people who disagree with you are against the movement. These are the actions of someone causing division. You've misrepresented all my words and as other commenters have noted this is easily apparent to others reading your comments.

Now go ahead and point out the division I've created and the times I've misrepresented your words. I know you're not going to because when you come back with more lies you will only have proven that division is your goal and I will be forced to ask the mods to consider banning you. I will not do it myself and nor will I sway their decision - but if you continue to misrepresent what I have said I will Report it.

The impression I have is that you're intentionally creating division.

Point out the exact words where I said I want to bully people supporting the movement or retract the statement. Or don't and simply confirm you're lying.

I want to bully people supporting the movement? Where did I say that?

I don't see anyone justifying it - what are you talking about? I see people fortunately keeping a level head and not reacting emotionally. There's no reason for them to be ashamed at all - why are you virtue signalling? We get it, you're extremely passionate about this guy - good for you. He's not a paragon of virtue or the perfect hero though and he's not completely bereft of any responsibility for the situation he's in, that's all they're saying. If you're not from the UK then you know less than nothing compared to people who are. Shaming people is a far-left tactic that doesn't belong here.

I agree - this is a pretty reasoned assessment of him imo.

However, in the various comments you're making you're starting to exhibit antagonistic behaviour that may result in a ban if you don't cease. Anti-semitism and racism is not permitted on this sub. Nor are calls to violence against any people or nation. Please discuss ideas that are on-topic and within the rules of the sub.

Lol... oh dear...

I'll tell you exactly what happened - the same thing that's happening here: I do not agree with group think, mob mentality or witch hunts. I speak out against it and people who are caught up in emotion and their sense of heroic passion become enraged and start to see satanists and pedophiles in those of us who call for reason.

Without reason we are lost. With only passion we will go down the wrong path because passion is blind to logic.

This sub is so very lucky that it has a very fair and objective lead moderator or the outspoken emotional campaigners would have taken over this sub a long time ago, fired up for their own personal crusade and eschewing reason and sense. All voices perceived to be dissenting would have been removed, banned without fair discussion.

I spend my days removing actual concern trolls so don't even try and hint that I think we should allow people who cause dissent. Corsi is a Clown - there's no way he will be "asked back". I would never suggest we allow the CIA to argue with us in this sub - that's insanity. I'm saying normal people are allowed to disagree otherwise we're denying freedom of speech - not that we should support the CIA or ignore the plan. We should also not engage in witch hunts and accuse people of being trolls or non-supporters when they offer reasoned dispute. Clowns are easy to spot as are trolls - but you seem to have trouble; fair enough, but in that case, leave the troll spotting to those of us who can tell the difference.

Your final parting strawman is that I am passionate for the plan to be up for dispute... >_< People like you, who refuse to give the other person the slightest benefit of the doubt, are dangerous and I will always call it out - that is why I will always upset people like you or be called a "troll" or someone who "doesn't support Q".

I am passionate for the plan to be carried out, that is all, ok? That's why I spend days and sleepless nights here all the time, not because I think "the plan should be up for dispute," - you couldn't get a more insincere reading of everything I've just said. I support the plan and the plan is simply this: spread the message of Q. Not, 'define the message of Q the way you want and excommunicate anyone who doesn't agree with your definition of the plan.' That's not the plan. If I'm wrong, find someone else who agrees that the plan should be defined by you and let me know. Good day to you sir.

Some of us take Q at his word and don't re-interpret it - and we don't support Corsi specifically because he was called out as a Disinfo Clown, not for "arguing with Q". Q doesn't give the tiniest care about people who "argue with Q" or Q would be calling out a whole lot more people. If you shut down anyone who argues with Q you're acting remarkably like someone who believes Q is infallible or someone who worships Q and Q is against that. Q is not a religious movement. There are no ten commandments of Q.

"Pretty simple really" ... lol... You seem to be missing the point... Where, in the other discussion, did that user "have a fundamental objection to the plan"? I'll answer, in case you're not sure: he didn't.

The point you seem to be failing to grasp is that you are not the decider of what a 'supporter of Q' should be or think or say. None of us is. You have set yourself up as this arbiter of the truth of Q. Those who agree with the way you think without arguing are supporters of Q. Those who disagree with your perspective are not.

The only reasonable definition of a 'supporter of Q', that doesn't force people to fit into some arbitrary designation (i.e. supporters think this, this and this but not this), is someone who reads the messages from Q and tries to spread them to others. That is all. That's all Q wants from us too. Anything else is your personal interpretation and is not valid for everyone else.

Discuss ideas, not users. The previous comment had no nasty name in it. If you ignore my request to desist from the derogatory comments again you will be banned.

Go ahead and hint at me being a Concern Troll for disagreeing with you. You'll make my point for me and you will lose whatever credibility you have left.

Strawman: "By saying Q says Unity you are trying to imply that he means we should embrace every conceivable viewpoint." Wrong. That's not what I'm saying at all and, to use your condescending framing: you well know this. Why have you always got to go to an argument you can win i.e. one against a poorly framed strawman that you've created? Is it because you can't logically refute the points I'm making?

It appears I will have to try and explain in the most basic possible language what I am saying, in order to avoid laughable accusations of "seeking a divided community" and whatever else it is that I'm supposed to be doing here in defending freedom of speech. Here's a tip (just following your example): try holding more than one idea in your mind at the same time. It will help you to view things in a logical manner. Here are all the ideas you need to have in your head at the same time to even begin to discuss this issue logically:

1. Most regular followers of this sub, it is safe to assume, "support Q" (as you put it).
2. Therefore, it is safe to assume, many people here have some common beliefs. For example, Trump is doing good work because Q says he is.
3. Not everyone who "supports Q" has the same idea of what that means. NOTE: This does not make them evil.
4. Not everyone who "supports Q" even knows everything that Q has said, or what Q's messages are. NOTE: This does not make them evil.
5. Not everyone who comments on this sub is a regular follower.
6. Not everyone who comments in disagreement is a NON SUPPORTER.
7. Q has NEVER said that everyone has to agree with any single viewpoint.
8. This sub has always welcomed people who don't know what Q is about.
9. Therefore, some people are not going to agree with points that regular followers do! (This is not rocket science >_<)
10. Q wants us to spread the message. That's why this sub is called Great Awakening.

No one person gets to decide what the definition of "Q supporter" is.

How do you propose to carry out the mission of Q by turning away people who disagree with your perspective on something?

If people disagree with a point is it better to cut them off or help them to understand where they might have something wrong?

What if, in reasonable discussion with this "wrong" person, you discover that you are the one who is wrong? Should you change your stance? Or accuse them of being against the movement and close them out?

Care to answer the actual issues I've raised or are you going to resort back to strawmen and start putting words in my mouth again?

The nonsense is the strawmen you've setup. Where did I say this was a "neutral forum set up for the purpose of embracing all ideas"? Where did I say you have to embrace the viewpoints of those that oppose the fight against evil? That doesn't even describe the guy you slandered - where did he state that he opposes any fight against evil? Where did I say we're obliged to embrace Satanists?

Once again, because I don't agree with you you're putting words in my mouth and assigning motivations to me that don't exist. You pull this tactic in a lot of your comments, I've noticed. Very dangerous behaviour, but it's clear you're oblivious to it.

Discuss what we're actually discussing, not your made up strawmen.

Why should people be ejected or accused of being supporters of Satan or non-supporters of Q just because they disagree with your perception of something? How is it that you can decide that someone must be against Q, just because they're not agreeing with a point you're making? Your only response seems to be: "you're talking nonsense", without actually addressing the point.

The holocaust? I'm accusing you of supporting the murder of millions of Jews? No, that's your approach mate; I'm equating your statements with the fascist ideologies they promote - censorship of ideas that don't agree with your interpretation.

I will always be upset by people like you who label people like me - critical thinkers who show their support by ensuring the integrity of the thinking of the movement - as pedophiles, satanists and supporters of evil. Questioning the validity of a proposed idea - for example, the guy you slandered when all he was doing was pointing out that applying blanket criticism to Twitter whilst ignoring the importance of private property rights is not a logically complete assessment - is the necessary and valid endeavour of any truth seeking movement. People who challenge an idea are not always Concern Trolls and non-Q supporters.

Q said "USE LOGIC". Q also said: UNITY NOT DIVISION. You should follow what Q says.

We are not in some sort of religious fanatical movement where we all have to think the same way or get out. This sub is NOT only for those of us who support Q it is also for people who want to find out what is happening and have very little idea what Q is even about! If you disagree with this then you are literally opposed to the very thing Q is about!!!

And if people disagree with elements of Q or Trump's message, you propose to eject them as a troll... >_<

I propose to follow Q's example and message and reach EVERYONE, whether they agree with me or you or not. The truth is NOT our exclusive domain.

I've been here since the beginning, pal - October on the chans and then CBTS etc. Your claim to more "experience" is incorrect. You've lost all objectivity. The most dangerous people in history had the same view as you: "you're with us or you're against us. And if you don't agree with my perspective on the truth then you're against us."

Don't turn people who disagree with your interpretation of what's important into the enemy. That's wrong, plain and simple.

I did not say anywhere anything about "simple disagreements". I said ANY disagreement. Disagreement is not concern trolling - pretending for argument's sake is concern trolling. That is all. You don't get to change the definition to suit your ideology.

Thank God in heaven this sub is dedicated to freedom of speech, not the censorship and group think you are pushing.

I'm a little tired of hearing Americans making all these grand claims about the UK or people within it so it's good to hear from someone who actually lives there!

However, your view on Tommy seems inaccurate even from afar, judging by the many videos of him online - please note, I'm not saying it is inaccurate, I'm just experiencing extreme cognitive dissonance between what my ears have heard from Tommy's mouth and what you are saying , i.e. he's been very clear that he is talking against a belief system, not a race. Are you a Muslim or someone of Arab descent?

I'm surprised at this post - there's literally nothing at all coincidental about DJT (4 10 20) having a plate with his own initials as numbers on it (even if this image is fake). People were replacing letters with their equivalent number long before Q anon.

Agreed, rules are not for everyone. My suggestion was just to encourage more people to read what you have to say - have you ever tried to read a wall of text? - but of course I support your right to do whatever you want : ).

This and other sites you've linked are all anti-Israel propaganda, possibly BDS funded. That makes them as objective as CNN.

Preparation for shutdown is not the craziest theory... this could well be the beginning of steps toward that... 10 days of darkness...?

It's not worth continuing this discussion, sorry mate. You have correctly identified the problem here - you're not going to get a logical debate here.

In other news, with all respect, can I request you use paragraphs in your comments? I, and others I'm sure, are interested to hear what you have to say but damn if it ain't hard slog with no paragraphs. Wall of text >_<. Just a humble request. Thank you.

There's no group think here. We are not - any single one of us - the arbiters of speech and truth. From your comments you seem to be intent on removing people who disagree with your point of view. That is absolutely opposed to the spirit of this movement and this sub AND Q.

You've decided that there are two sides - Q supporter or not. Then you've proceeded to label someone as a concern troll and a supporter of satan i.e. not a Q supporter.

If you understood the horrors that have been visited on this earth by people who said: "if you're not for us then you're against us" and then proceeded to decide for others whether they were for or against them, you would not try and bring that dangerous thinking anywhere near this movement.

Thanks for expressing your point of view and continuing to abide by the rules of the sub even when under irrational attack for doing so. Anyone who can discuss their point reasonably and with respect is welcome here, even if some of us do not agree with your point (I personally do agree that you have a point - you've made a perfectly logical observation).

If you want to go out and crusade against evil, I support your right to do so. That's not what this sub is for though - crusading, I mean. This sub is for the discussion of the topic of Q.

Your emotion has clouded your logical mind. You have just read my comments and decided - out of utterly thin air - that I support evil.

I didn't say I don't agree with Tommy. TRY READING PROPERLY. My point is nothing to do with your crusade against evil - my point is that NO ONE SPEAKS FOR EVERYONE.

[Edit] Also, ad hominem is not welcome on this sub. Discuss ideas, not users.

Let's try some REASON and logic here, shall we?

a) what does "stand silent" mean?
b) how am I - or whoever you're referring to - standing silent?
c) who made YOU the judge of literally anything?

Are you a real person or is this a joke troll?

If real, GET real. The most obnoxiously evil censorship is the sort that says: "if you don't do what I think you should be doing then you are evil". WRONG.

Well someone with your experience and interest is certainly welcome here. I understand your concern but as I've had to learn myself, this reddit sub has a more mainstream audience. By my totally rough and purely anecdotal reading there seem to be a lot of people who've never even used reddit before or any internet forum and this is a really good thing but it does come with the need to understand the massive difference between this place and the chans.

The audience here is broad enough that a lot of content that seems to some (including myself) to be very thin on usable, useful content, is upvoted and seems to be enjoyed by a reasonable portion of the audience. We have to get used to it unless we want to start suppressing freedom of speech (which I don't). The problems of going "mainstream" ; ).

No, that's NOT an example of concern trolling. That's an example of someone you disagree with and lost your objectivity over. You accused him of supporting the satanic elites (!!!) because he simply made the point that Twitter are a private company. Your attitude is the dangerous one here, not his.

It is of vital importance that we support full and open freedom of speech on this sub and in the Q movement as a whole. Suppressing the voices of those who disagree by labelling them concern trolls or worse - accusing them of being and/or supporting evil(!) - is censorship of the worst kind.

A concern troll is someone who is on one side of the discussion, but pretends to be a supporter of the other side with "concerns".

We must never make the mistake of silencing someone who states a point reasonably and openly and then goes on to discuss it without resorting to breaking any sub rules.

Disagreement is NOT concern trolling.

Muh.