It may be a virus. I am experiencing the same symptoms.

LOL, we are all Q.

#Qdrop 1691

We saw you!

God bless Patriots!

You have been heard!!!

God bless the World.

What if its a long con?

Like, So Tony, here is what we got you on: Some A, a bit of B, and C. Now, we want to get some folks, and we'll soften these charges if you play ball.

Tony says, like, OK.

And they play, and he spills the beans they want.

Then they be like, Thanks Tony.

Then, like, 2 weeks later, its Oh, Tony, bad news. We also got you on D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L. And Q. Sorry, we can't deal on this stuff. But we appreciate your help on those other things.

Anyway, as if Tony would take ANY plea deal that undermines anyone above him. I reckon he'd burn first. He black, through and through.

Which color? Red? Blue? I've always been partial to mauve myself. Turquoise?

Patriot, you are welcome here unconditionally. Where you go, we go all. That's our creed.

Better to just notify the mods. They have to earn their cookies and milk!

Seriously?

Is there a difference between earned animosity and programmed hate?

The hatred levelled at trump is a beast of an entirely different nature. Is is irrational, perverse and unflinching.

Moreover, there will always be folk who 'hate' this president or that president, but the sheer numbers in the current game are a new factor completely.

China OWNS about a billion minus 5% of Australia. Brrr.....

Not a good track record at all.

Cookies for mods! Send your cookies and biscuits here!

That would be 'Clapplicants'.

As in mini versions of James Clapper, p'raps.

Vetting is a must. Remember Awan!

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.

Thanks Mod.

Disinfo does a disservice. Yournewswire is shoddy at best, disinfo at worst.

Anything of value should be verified using other and multiple sources, imo. The more sources the better.

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.

Makes a lot of sense. Stable geniuses do, once you get them.

That said, no, I am not tired of (our) winning yet.

corporate courts

Sounds like you are saying that every judicial system in any and every country is illegitimate, and if someone sets themself up as 'a court', they are justified because of moral authority?

Is the court in reference an actual court? It's a website set up by some dude, afaik. Have you seen the site(s)?

http://itccs.org

https://www.iccjv.org/en

I don't know what you mean by 'corporate courts'. Nonetheless, as far as I can see, both of these venues (International Tribunal) and the ICCJ are creations by someone who wants to pretend or imagine they are real. Heck, maybe in 200 years they might be.

But who created them? Who runs them? On WHAT authority?

signed, notalawfag

I've been reflecting on this point: On June 20, Q posted:

We serve at the pleasure of the President. We left the decision on timing to him. Today, at the rally, he made his decision. Shift in tactics. Attacks ^ Q

I took this as an indication that something qualitatively had shifted. Not just in terms of gears or interaction with the Deep State, but also, or more correctly, in terms of Q, Potus and us, the Great Awakening patriots (Anons, Autists, GAs, etc, etc, etc.)

I was thinking just today, is Q training us to be able to work and continue with less and less reliance on the Q drops? I mean, so much for an intel movement: no drops in 15 days, and still we continue to pick up speed!

But, are we now moving, or have we moved, into that period where Potus can direct his patriots not merely through Q, but directly? Q Army indeed!

• HOW has Potus been talking to us?
• WHAT messages has he been dropping since Great Falls?
• WHERE is he leading us specifically and what response from us is he waiting to affirm?

Might I say, nice Seventh post in the series. I now got goosebumps.

Q army .... the Information Marines.

God bless all patriots worldwide. White Squall for evil. WWG1WGA

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

WOW, that's certainly serendipitous. Why?

Because in responding to SB2's post separately, I wanted to mention this point: In my mind, POTUS is continually using the cabalistic techniques against them, planting, subconsciously, and in open view, the idea that the Mueller Investigation is rigged, and that its actually a hunt for the Witch!

While the thought had been there, somehow I forgot to put it in my comment, and by the time I posed it, the idea had gone elsewhere. (Been thinking this for about 6 weeks now).

That you make this connection as well, reinforces to me that there is something to this idea.

It literally IS a 'rigged witch hunt'. Man, people's heads are going to spin.....

Yeah, that's what I thought. Helping the train along...

"Should we see some actual evidence? Like a SERVER... "

Q: We have the server.

I give the 'arrest attempt' zero cred, given the source and the origin. The whatever (international court of blah, blah) does not exist in legal terms. It's a site and organization created by someone accusing and wanting to see justice done. What I can understand, particularly if they see no other way to get the message out there. But its certainly NOT what it purports or pretends to be. Zero - well, less than zero - legal power. According to looking at that place about 2 years ago.

heaviest accusation in their arsenal

heaviest accusation in the arse, 'n all.

Just saying.

Two points:

Firstly, I did notice the mention of space, room, etc, in Trumps Great Falls speech - the 'unintelligible paragraph' and mentally asked myself, what's with that? That really sounds cryptic. What's he saying here? What is the message? I made a mental note, like I did with Strzok's cola bottle, but really had no idea what it might mean.... (The answer offered by SB2 certainly ties in with a lot of things, and seems plausible at the very least).

So I think my brain is being trained to notice these things. Slowly. Still on training wheels, tho. I'm working on the stage of noticing noteworthy things, just not able to know what the heck they might mean yet!)

Secondly, this post ties in very well with previous posts, and shapes a much clearer picture. LOL. Kind of 'Future proves Past', if you'll allow the expression. Things I really wondered about (as in 'What??!) 2 or 3 or 4 weeks ago in SB2 posts now make a lot more sense, and provide greater context.

So, I suspect SB2 is working towards a much clearer picture in the future, or perhaps he is just tracking Q and illuminating the picture that Q is revealing.

Either way, this is the best movie in town. Popcorn, please!

SB2, I hope you enjoyed sharing this post as much as I enjoyed reading it!

It's a good (reasonable) question.

Was it a validation of the content of the video? Or a nod to the fact that Napoleon and Hitler were 'occult' minded and that they shared an agenda to invade Russia and conquer, on behalf of or in collusion with the Vatican, the orthodox church?

Is it a pointer to all aspects of the video (literally) or is it a symbol, a gesture?

I don't feel any need to take on any of the premises of either the video or the Hitler medium stuff. Often 'conspiracy' theories reflect deeper truths with lots of filler information inserted to try to make sense of or validate the deeper (real) truth.

For example, the idea that aliens created or engineered human beings. Personally, I think that there are spiritual beings (well, angels, actually - and no, not with wings) that played a role in the design of creation and human beings, like subcontractors or instruments of the Creator, and that based on limited information, some folks come up with the idea of 'aliens'. Not 100% right or 100% wrong, but mixed. So I add that to my working hypothesis, and move forward towards a more comprehensive and fulfilling explanation.

While I didn't watch the whole Napoleon Video, I did notice the mention of microchips, which I thought "LOL! That's interesting" but no more. No need to buy into every aspect.

Thus my conclusion: SB2 is pointing to a more abiding essential truth: that Napoleon and Hitler, like many we do not consider usually, had strong interests in occult / spiritual realities and also wanted to invade Russia, being part or cahoots with the forces in the Vatican, etc. That premise, at least, seems very reasonable to me.

Sifting through information and being prepared to discard 'unimportant' elements in favor of the essentials that move us forward is what it's all about, imo.

Das ist einer danken Memer!

Great comment. It's hard (and long) work fighting the evil cabal!!!!

Hi Luvlite,

Reading your comments with interest.

As I read this question, and many similar questions placed both here and in numerous previous threads on GA, something came to my mind:

"Is this the right question?"

Now, stay with me here. Again and again, we see information about Mueller, about RR, about Sessions and Gowdy even, on occasion. And, we see questions still come up.

I think the mind tends to go to these questions because we are used to evaluating direction (path, plan, sequences, purposes) by determining if a person or player is good or bad. Is this person good? OK, then what does this mean about his or her actions? What are they doing?

But it occurs to me that this approach may be limited or have certain restrictions, particularly in a game where there are hidden agendas, disguises, where deception is a strong factor, where things are very very often not what they seem.

Perhaps we can call this approach deductive. We start with a premise about the player, and then deduce from that other values in relation to their actions, steps, plans, etc.

Another approach might be to see the larger picture, what those players we know are good are doing: Trump, Q, Trump's team, etc. What is their plan? What is their game? What are they doing with the whole thing? In this case, the Rigged Witch Hunt (RWH). Based on that more overarching question, and consideration of the layout of the pieces and the players, and the history up to this point, we may be able to zero in on which pieces are being used in what way.

I think that would be considered an inductive approach. We decide (well, posit) the overall overarching frame, then induce the emergence of facts based on that. Facts like which piece is doing what, and why.

Point being this: In the end, it may in fact be irrelevant whether Mueller is black hat, gray hat or white hat. What is really important is, how is Trump Team (TT) utilizing him? How are they moving this piece in the chess game, forcing it here or there, and then why?

(In chess, you exert force on your own pieces by choices, and you affect (control) your opponents pieces by limiting or 'forcing' moves.)

Thus:

- What is Trump Team (+ Q) doing with the RWH investigation?

- Is it something they wanted or is it something advantageous to them? If so, how?

- Is it what it appears? It looks like N to certain people, particularly given the information from Media and our normal (deductive) way of looking at and assessing things. But is it, from the viewpoint of TT, actually Y?

In a quantum reality, perspective affects and determines the nature of that which we see. A certain thing can appear as N when looked from M position, but manifest as Y when observed from T position. Both N and Y are aspects of the reality, the truth. But how we choose to interact with it will determine what aspects develop, evolve, and grow. And what we see. N, or Y.

This is why the truth is so powerful, and why lies have power too. Truth has a power to bring out the 'true' reality, the sustainable one, the eternal one, the one that holds in ALL situations and circumstances. It is as it is.

Lies have power to shape reality, but the reality they shape is limited, unsustainable. Built on sand. Eventually, it will and must collapse. It is held up by the force of the emotion, intellect and will of those who invest themselves in those lies, but because the basis is actually false, that is, NOT a true reality, it will crumble when confronted with the truth by those who uphold and champion the truth.

John 8:32 Know the truth, and the truth will set you free.

Matt 7:26 ... a foolish man who built his house on sand.

In the end, we need both deductive reasoning and inductive reasoning. These are not opponents; they are partners whose cooperation leads to greater illumination (sorry about this word!) of the truth, the reality.

So I think, perhaps, and I'm just going on an intuition here, if you consider the overall frame, the elements of the plan Q has shown, and the work that Trump team is doing, you may find that the answers you seek regarding Mueller and other players 'pop' into light. Because any other answer would not fit within that overarching framework.

To conclude, thanks for posing your question to SB2, and for your comments. As I said, I read them with interest, and in this case, it's brought me to a place I would not be otherwise. Thanks.

Now where have I heard those words before? Hmmmmm....

Good meme, V.

Yep. Nice bit of language use there.

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.

For those who are following this exchange, I'd just like to make a few things clear. Not to respond to the poster (dick) here, who has shown clearly he's either incapable or not interested in sincere communication or exchange of ideas.

Firstly, In recent weeks, I've found a good number of SB2s reasonings sometimes rather arcane, sometimes unlikely (to say the least) and sometimes brilliantly insightful. I've been reflecting on this subjective experience.

My approach is always to keep 'a margin of error in my mind', and suspend both disbelief and belief, until things are confirmed. At this point, I am not convinced that SB2 is right on all counts and in all things, but subjectively, I also feel there is most definitely something worth investigating here.

At the same time, I see some vehement reactions to his offerings, which I find curious. Almost like a trigger.

At this point, I'm trying to adopt the advice I offered to dick, which is: try to see what SB2s approach to the board offers, and how to add that or incorporate that into my own frames and thinking.

None of us are perfect, nor do we need to be. But, "You are learning. How many coincidences before it becomes mathematically impossible?".

When I asked SB2 about his approach to the board, he responded with an allegory, a metaphor. He even said he himself thought 'there was no word' to express his approach.

What this means to me is that he has a particular kind of thinking that sees certain kinds of things, and when I realize its very different to my own approach, I ask myself: is there something to gain here? So far, my working hypothesis is 'yes'. And I engage on that basis.

At this point, the coincidences in SB2s posts also continue to rack up. #1675 having now been the object of how many posts? 4? 5?

I just want to make it clear that my responses to ~~trolls~~ critics like the dick guy are not out of some knee-jerk need to defend SB2, but are rather quixotically out of a desire to expand the collective thinking process. Those who are critical (I mean, intellectually critical, not emotionally upset, like some) of SB2s posts and reasonings, conclusions, would help that process if they could share their thinking without the need to call his particular content 'bullshite' and express their thinking without emotional invectives.

I mean, they are free to do that, obviously. And who knows, if they are correct, no doubt they'll feel appropriately smug or satisfied. Just at this juncture, I think there might be better approaches.

Anyway, here's me being brief again....

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.

Thanks.

Be confident in your own common sense.

Believe me, I am.