I'm certainly not attempting to give Schwab any quarter. But I am serious about protecting this community and the work we do. Unvetted, knee-jerk reaction generating information that isn't authentic hurts us, hurts our efforts, and hurts our contribution to the war we are in.

I really don't get it why people find that so hard to understand. It's like CNN throwing up fake news about Trump. People with their established biases about Trump, and with a passion about disliking or hating Trump, simply swallow what they are told without engaging their critical thinking or vetting process at all.

It's foolish to imagine that the same processes aren't employed over this side of the war, deliberating by miscreants, but also through carelessness, (lack of awareness), effort and discernment over here.

I really took a look at the sauce of the tweet. I recognize clickbaity features very quickly these days. Upon investigation, the initial recognition is borne out.

The guy who posted the tweet gives NO source or reference whatsoever for hsi claim. And as all good clickbaiters do, he takes a piece of rock and makes a boulder out of it. (Hey, who is interested in a piece of rock, but a boulder? That sure gets the attention - which is what the baiter wants.)

His only reference point provided was the use of the expression 'black swan event' in a Klaus Schwab speech.

I looked at his youtube channel. I mean, its obvious sensationalism, clickbaitism. Might there be some facts thrown in amongst the rabid shouting? Sure. Always is. That's how it works.

I do take his words at face value, so when he said this, doesn't matter as much as him saying it, of which I have little to no doubt....

OK. I don't know why you believe this. I mean that Schwab actually said this. The only reference you've provided here is this lame tweeter / tabloidish personality on social media making a claim that "Schwab declared X, Y , z, publicly".

There is no speech actually reference, no words, no actual factual content that supports that claim or even presents a basis for it. For me, that is instant Red Flag.

I don't care about Scwab, I care about all the people who on the cusp of awakening are constantly being attacked with content to divert them from finding the actual truth and more importantly, constantly being directed away from building their OWN critical thinking and awareness. Instead, such fake news content is an out and out invitation to engage in lemming-like behavior rather than becoming an impenetrable robust myth busting digital warrior that advances the actual truth, rather than sensationalism.

If you cannot agree that integrity in information is critical to our work, then I really don't know what to say. Perhaps my ministrations simply fall on deaf ears.

But after being subjected to the most outrageous fear porn from the Global Cabal for several years, I've seen first hand the damage this does to people.

People are free to believe that they want. Meanwhile, I see far too many (in my opinion) of our pedes oblivious to the importance of best practice in vetting, filtering and discerning the information that comes across our screens. Q was all about building up that capacity. Without it, we're not digital soldiers. We're digital fodder. Too many appear to simply be following the same processes and programming that any libtard reacting to CNN nonsense about Trump do, just swapping out the theme to suit the audience.

The more untruth is put out there about Schwab and the WEGF, for example, the more the real truth becomes blurred and inaccessible to the population. That's what disinformation is ALL about.

It's the behavior that's at issue here. Schwab himself is not relevant.

I'm certainly not attempting to give Schwab any quarter. But I am serious about protecting this community and the work we do. Unvetted, knee-jerk reaction generating information that isn't authentic hurts us, hurts our efforts, and hurts our contribution to the war we are in.

I really don't get it why people find that so hard to understand. It's like CNN throwing up fake news about Trump. People with their established biases about Trump, and with a passion about disliking or hating Trump, simply swallow what they are told without engaging their critical thinking or vetting process at all.

It's foolish to imagine that the same processes aren't employed over this side of the war, deliberating by miscreants, but also through carelessness, (lack of awareness), effort and discernment over here.

I really took a look at the sauce of the tweet. I recognize clickbaity features very quickly these days. Upon investigation, the initial recognition is borne out.

The guy who posted the tweet gives NO source or reference whatsoever for hsi claim. And as all good clickbaiters do, he takes a piece of rock and makes a boulder out of it. (Hey, who is interested in a piece of rock, but a boulder? That sure gets the attention - which is what the baiter wants.)

His only reference point provided was the use of the expression 'black swan event' in a Klaus Schwab speech.

I looked at his youtube channel. I mean, its obvious sensationalism, clickbaitism. Might there be some facts thrown in amongst the rabid shouting? Sure. Always is. That's how it works.

I do take his words at face value, so when he said this, doesn't matter as much as him saying it, of which I have little to no doubt....

OK. I don't know why you believe this. The only reference you've provided here is this lame tweeter / tabloidish personality on social media making a claim that "Schwab declared X, Y , z, publicly."

There is no speech actually reference, no words, no actual factual content that supports that claim or even presents a basis for it. For me, that is instant red flag.

If you cannot agree that integrity in information is critical to our work, then I really don't know what to say.

People are free to believe that they want. Meanwhile, I see far too many of our pedes oblivious to how they ignore actual good practice that Q was all about, and simply behave following the same processes and programming that any libtard reacting to CNN nonsense about Trump do.

It's that behavior that's at issue here. Schwab is not relevant.

I'm certainly not attempting to give Schwab any quarter. But I am serious about protecting this community and the work we do. Unvetted, knee-jerk reaction generating information that isn't authentic hurts us, hurts our efforts, and hurts our contribution to the war we are in.

I really don't get it why people find that so hard to understand. It's like CNN throwing up fake news about Trump. People with their established biases about Trump, and with a passion about disliking or hating Trump, simply swallow what they are told without engaging their critical thinking or vetting process at all.

It's foolish to imagine that the same processes aren't employed over this side of the war, deliberating by miscreants, but also through carelessness, (lake of care), effort and discernment over here.

I really took a look at the sauce of the tweet. I recognize clickbaity features very quickly these days. Upon investigation, the initial recognition is borne out.

The guy who posted the tweet gives NO source or reference whatsoever for hsi claim. And as all good clickbaiters do, he takes a piece of rock and makes a boulder out of it. (Hey, who is interested in a piece of rock, but a boulder? That sure gets the attention - which is what the baiter wants.)

His only reference point provided was the use of the expression 'black swan event' in a Klaus Schwab speech.

I looked at his youtube channel. I mean, its obvious sensationalism, clickbaitism. Might there be some facts thrown in amongst the rabid shouting? Sure. Always is. That's how it works.

I do take his words at face value, so when he said this, doesn't matter as much as him saying it, of which I have little to no doubt....

OK. I don't know why you believe this. The only reference you've provided here is this lame tweeter / tabloidish personality on social media making a claim that "Schwab declared X, Y , z, publicly."

There is no speech actually reference, no words, no actual factual content that supports that claim or even presents a basis for it. For me, that is instant red flag.

If you cannot agree that integrity in information is critical to our work, then I really don't know what to say.

People are free to believe that they want. Meanwhile, I see far too many of our pedes oblivious to how they ignore actual good practice that Q was all about, and simply behave following the same processes and programming that any libtard reacting to CNN nonsense about Trump do.

It's that behavior that's at issue here. Schwab is not relevant.