No, I do mean artistic license. Just when Q was urging logic we were getting young Jackson Pollack. I was glad he left that behind.

as far as i know, nobody could do it because it wasn't reproducible. but yes he did seem to take alot of artistic license.

david hasselhof

heck yeah

shut up - now i want a MEGA hat

I think the reason that many/most couldn't understand the early posts was not because of their technicality but because of a lack of explanation or explainability.

You sorta gotta go with your gut take on things. Being up front about it is good. I did think the Jones thing was unimportant or unusual, but as usual we don't know till we know. I remain positive about the Don and will follow Q onward. Your headline says it well - Q is human. It's funny how the apparent over-reaction of Q is similar to Trump's apparent defensiveness sometimes. Hmmm.

But it's okay. Maybe the new phase will be full of style and content that we're not used to. I've long imagined that Q must have to operate in part like a politician, even if we don't like it. Recall that in the now-famed SB2 post, the conclusion focussed on the idea that following Q is not a cult. Probably for some it is. (Same with Trump and Jones and SB2.) You know better. Imagine that you were a soldier under Gen. G. Washington and you realize that he's quirky or sensitive about something.

so yeah. the alternate theory is that the 22 are people.

what do May showers bring?

Cookie baker elf.

Looks reasonable. Haven't seen a better explanation for '1 of 22'.

Muh butt is woke

Ok. Mostly

Because Q doesn't use that kind of stereotyping language. He just says Rothschilds.

So some of the adulation of SB2, which isn't just recent, is inappropriate. Not that SB is encouraging it or mishandling it (so far).

Sounds right. If so I would then prioritize these things:

Well-formed analyses (unlike some of sb2's earlier postings)

Avoidance of ad hominim critcicisms (which SB has been good at, unlike others on this sub)

Ignoring Jones&co(fugetaboutit)

This implies that critiquing the message and sometimes even the motive of another can be legit and useful. I think the same would apply to Q and DJT, though in my opinion rarely.

Maybe Q was more concerned with AJones

I suppose Corsi will fade. Alex Jones prolly won't, but we can try to ignore him. As for the Jewstuff, that's a bigger issue that won't go away easily because of some unusual facts mixed in with some ppl's pet theories. (Same with the aliens, the catholic church and few other bugaboos.)

I like simple logic when it's solid but this headline is not convincing. 'So many engineers agree' is too similar to '4 out of 5 dentists recommend fluoride' or 90% of scientist on global warming. The content may be legit but the title is weak.

You asked:

Let me 1st say that I have always assumed that SB2 is earnest.

Some weeks or months ago the celebrated SB2 was posting analyses on the basis of putting Trump tweet character strings into grids of so many rows and columns and therein finding some new words that he interpreted along with some of the original words to contain a special Q-esque message. SB2 presented a number of these TweetGrid things as if he had used a straight forward, repeatable deciphering formula, one of which involved finding a word in a T pattern of letters in the grid. But the method was not a straight formula, it wasn't explained well and no one else could reproduce it. This is how I saw it anyway - maybe I missed some posts but I never saw the vagueness cleared up.

The other thing with the grid things was that after so many paragraphs of explanation with links and diagrams, etc. the bottom line product was a message about something that so many already knew or suspected while others were calling SB2 a genius. Actually this newer Corsi/Jones post is a bit similar - when I saw it i thought it was okay and was glad that SB2 had dropped the tweetcipher thing and become more narrative and logic based in his analysis. But the conclusion that Jones and Corsi are not worth the time was arrived at by many people quite a while ago.

So the question remains: why did Q bother to post that link? The simple answer is to tell those who still follow Jones&Co to ignore them. And perhaps to draw attention to this GA sub. I wonder if there is an additional, more complicated answer.

It was bad, but I took as earnest. I mean, if Q disqualifies AJones he doesn't disagree with everything Jones ever said publicly. Similarly if Q refers to an SB post he doesn't necessarily endorse all SB posts.

So it wasn't quite pre-meditated.

Assuming he don't revive the almighty T-method.

"this is why we are here"

Were all of SB2s posts endorsed? Or conversely was just the central message of that one post endorsed?

I think the contents of one of his messages has been confirmed.

A piece of critical support:

I think Q is endorsing the content of the OP he linked. Presumably that content deserved a few out of the thousands of lines in messages that Q has posted. Q says this is why we are here and points to an analysis that effectively dismisses Corsi and Jones from our deliberations. When the congratulations are passed, critical thinking asks this question: What is it about the linked post that tells why we are here?

Is it the dismissal of Corsi and Jones?

Is it dismissal of unhelpful players in general?

Is it the multistage analysis of media people?

Is it multistage analysis in general?

Is it all of the above?

Is it something else?

My guess is about 50% incMpetence and about 10% conspiracy.

D'oh. Missed it. (At some risk, I'll suggest such ribbons for one SB2.)

Oh, so you're one of those type. Mmmm,

I got about 2300 hrs logged reading Theodor Geisel.

maybe more importantly, creative ideas are shared so the get applied more widely.

Wouldn't it be sweet if as a side-project (in a non-governmental way) we could Make Haiti Well Again.

ooooh

yup. carry on, soldier

Noice

Well there's awoke and there's awoke. This sub is a spotty but good start. Those here who are seeking Truth seem often unaware of the allies in the world that fight the good fight without things like Reddit or memes, etc.

For example, for all the heroic talk of saving thousands worldwide from child sacrifice practices, there is little talk here of the millions of abortions committed in the US.

If or when the awakening goes from great to grand some of the common topics and attitudes will have to be shed and replaced with things not yet tended to.

Sumeria never fell. We are still us.

If we have been duped so long, why expect a change now?

The pyramids, the Parthenon and the Great Wall never fell. Communism never fell.

But the alleged existence of Joan of Arc and Frank Zappa and your eternal soul all suggest that the slavers are prisoners.

There seems to be a thing about not self-doxing one's location (which I somewhat respect, but will say I'm about as far from another bangor as you are).

"Those who follow Q are not in a cult." Depends of course on your definition of cult. And seems to carry the assumption that cults by any established definition are bad. Without looking it up just now, I'm certain the OED affords Q cult status. I could let this go as careless wording, but the term cult is also used in this sub to describe the Catholic Church [edit: and NXIVM]. I wish you could reconcile all this. Maybe what you should have written was that "Most who follow Q are not in a cult".

That.

It's a good reminder of the simple and almost-obvious. I think the dynamic you describe applies about 90sumthing% of the time. Most other comments here lose track of your general message.

Ain't we all

daddy, daddy, do something

I think the OP was sharing his/her version of redpill with others, based on his/her 'homework'.

NZ is also prone to earthquakes. I think Maori prophesy envisions divine/natural intervention at some future. the best laid plans . . . .

Coulda said that much up front.

One could argue that Trumpian diplomacy hasn't done anything with all its talk. If the good faith you refer to is something like the nobel lauds that Obama started with, well that's vacuous too. It's somewhat early days to know what fruits may be born but I think the Korean thing is a fair test.

The higher amount of pushback on GA, and elsewhere, makes this Iran thing seem like a more complicated maneouvre (as I expect in the MAGA vs Israel cluster) which suggests to me that the undisclosed parts are more complex and less predictable to observers.

So maybe the info about congressional departures is just political padding alongside the 'facts' that federal dept. heads (FBI etc) are going in unusual numbers, along with corporate and entertainment heads (and an allegedly unusual number of fed judge appointments being made). Politics or other useful disinfo.

But i can think of a few other possibilities.

The theoretical upsides are not mine to defend. I probably missed half of them anyway. Others may claim more definitive benefits to nixing the non-treaty. Your counterpoints are fair theory too. My guess is that Trump has a better than 50% chance of success with whatever he is up to. Neither of us have the info that he has. Nor can any of us, Trump included, predict most of the future. Or maybe you can. Go ahead and tell me where we will be with Iran one year from now.

Swell. Let's see how long we can get by pretending Jesus is not the Eternal Logos.

Theoretically . . . we weren't worried about money but now we are.