So legit question what proves that QAnon is actually real? I've not seen anything that Q has said come to pass. The month of the December will likely be no different. Or will it? Explain.
EDIT: Also, why are some of you saying there's no proof needed while others are trying your hardest to provide just that? Which is it?
Very clear. Check post history before replying. These people are not our friends. We're being brigaded lately.
Why even coming here to start an argument? Dont you have anything better to do with your time? Clearly you have no interest in actually discussing anything...
There are no reasons someone like you will accept. Go back to readin New York Times.
There's no point in validating any of it.
Just sit back and enjoy the show.
Validate that QAnon is a government insider and that anything he says will come to pass. That's kind of the point of this thread.
Thank you. This is something that confuses me so much about the "muh qtards" people. Like they're the most vocal supporters of your interests out there. If you dont want to be associated with them, dont say anything, but we're the ones doing work, we're the ones researching, and we always seem to have good leads. Cant tell you how many times I've seen Q drops posted on the front page of t_D.
And not to be taken wrong, I've been doing minimal digging. I'm not personally taking credit, but the people who have been deserve credit, not being harrasses for holding out hope that our government can right itself without violence.
I would say that it's risen concern to rampant pedophilia, human trafficking, etc. but it's not aimed in the right directions. The outrage towards these subjects is just pointed at Democrats and liberal media/celebrities (which is not to say there aren't some of them who've been involved in some of this stuff but it looks far more like a witch hunt when masses of people accuse only these people and a wide array of them based on little or no actual evidence).
Q, I think, is vague because he doesn't have to make as many bold claims and can just leave things open to interpretation (to keep what he's saying as still technically true and retain his audience).
The movement hasn't exposed any legitimate corruption or pedophilia rings to my knowledge. It's encouraged isolated incidents of violence and crimes. I think it remains to be seen if Q followers become more violent or not. I don't think the majority of Q followers are violent, though they are certainly misinformed and unable to digest any form of news outside of the most conservative media (can't even stomach Fox). If anything it's just served to increase demonization and divides in America today.
Damn, sir. Well written.
"The movement hasn't exposed any legitimate corruption or pedophilia rings to my knowledge"
NXVIM, John Of God, Maxwell, Epsteins Temple tunnel images, Rachel Chandler, The Bronfmans etc.
Financial corruption, thousands of CEOs stepping down. Court cases around the world re money laundering and bribery- this guy follows all the cases and there has been a surprising amount of them https://twitter.com/DawsonSField
Many heads of State have recently been charged with corruption, Mexicos former President I think, the shit going on in the Ukraine (and Burisima naming Biden in court for accepting $900,000 bribe)
As for 'only Dems & Media/Celebs' well boo hoo you need to get over your partisanship. Most of the pols involved ARE dems, but not all by any means. McCain, Flake, Romney all involved with corruption at least and probably child trafficking (which depends on open borders). Anyone who is supportive of open borders is taking money from the Cartels (remember El Chappo was starting to talk about paying off politicians in the US when they shut the public out of the trial). McConnell is likely up to his eyeballs in the murk too.
Look at the Republicans in Georgia it is becoming clear they they too are bribed by China. It is likely true that there are MORE corrupt on the Left than the Right but this is not totally surprising. The more Left they have gone the less they have loyalty to the US. Globalism at it's heart is Communism (which itself is a modern day pseudo-feudalism. In case you haven't noticed the Dems are out and proud now for what they stand for and it is NOT the US or it's Constitution.
The Bushes, Cheney and his gang are all part of the Globalist reset, they just use Good Cop/Bad Cop to get there. It is easier to subvert the Left because they were already trending that way whereas the Right are more concerned with individual liberty. The neo-Cons are same as neo-Libs in that they are Globalists aka Communist aka they think they gonna rule over you because they believe they are superior.
The media have been controlled a long time but it used to be more subtle, but now it's out in the open. They are gatekeepers. Many of them will be just mindlessly following orders and report what they are told, this is made easy because like all universities now they have been indoctrinated that communism is the worlds destiny but 'Merica is standing in the way. Many are fully on board with the end goal though and let us not forget the Wikileaks emails that showed their complicity.
Hollywood has long been a cesspool and full of child exploitation. If you open your eyes you will see their 'symbols' all over the place. Did you think the One Eyed gesture they all do was because it is trendy? Then there are the pedo symbols they insert everywhere that us poor innocent saps just thought were pretty designs.
There is a price though for someone of mediocre talent being fast tracked to 'celebrity' and fame and riches. There is always a price.
These people aren't the players though, they are the puppets. Exploited by greed and blackmail to shape our opinions and policies to move the world ever closer to the end goal of permanent slavery.
As for violence. Oh pulease. It isn't Q supporters who have been burning down cities and beating up and murdering people for their political opinions. A couple of lone nutjobs got a lot of media attention at exactly the time the media went on a co-ordinated hit piece on 'Q Anon'. What a coincidence.
If Q followers decided to be proactive rather than sitting back and trusting 'The Plan' they'd be a full on Civil War that would make Serbia look like a cake walk. And the media who are responsible for all the lies and division would likely be the first targets.
Far from increasing division it has woken people up across the Globe who were previously asleep and now they SEE where the division comes from. They SEE who these people are and why their lives are permanent struggle. And they wait patiently for those still asleep to join the Great Awakening and have their blinders removed. Q followers are unified with others around the world of all colours and religions (there are even Iranians in this fight) but we are losing tolerance for those who continue to act as foot soldiers for the establishment they claim to hate.
If you have the corporate media, the military industrial complex and all it's offshoots like the propaganda of the information/entertainment industry on your side, if you have Big Pharma and Big Tech, and all the Wall Street firms overwhelmingly donating to your side YOU ARE NOT THE RESISTANCE.
The only thing they are "resisting" is freedom from the people who are rebelling against The Man and attempting to throw off the shackles once and for all.
When Trump is reinstalled (and he will be) the 'resistance' will attempt to burn down their cities again and murder their fellow citizens in order to do the bidding of those who wish to bring about Global communism, and they will be supported every step of the way by the 'media' and Big Tech.
Q isn't the problem, a willful refusal to see what is under their nose by those caught in the corporate media net and the malevolent offshoots are..
Perhaps it is time for normies who haven't yet joined the Great Awakening and instead like to think they are 'woke' to ask "are we the baddies?" Yes, when they continue to deny what is happening, when they aid and abet a criminal and corrupt establishment to silence those who now SEE, yes they are indeed the 'baddies'
Maybe try reading Q drops yourself instead of listening to others who may not know what they are talking about qanon.pub
(Also don't forget Q is only 'vague' because he gets the Anons to search out the information using the Socratic Method. He mostly does NOT give any predictions that is anons interpreting and they don't always get it right)
Not our fault you haven't been paying attention and cannot be civil or polite. Books have been written documenting the Q proofs. Would you like me to tell you a title of one?
So what do you mean by real? Of course its real, somebody with access to pictures and able to coordinate Tweets with drops could only be from somebody close to Trump. The one that sealed it for me was the photos of North Korea from a plane. Now, as to the information, some of it is just information, some of it is "predictions". But you have to understand that Q is a psychological operation, with one primary purpose and a some secondary. The primary purpose was to bypass the biased media and wake up patriots. Some of the secondary purposes were to communicated with operators in the field, provide disinformation for bad actors, and to highlight areas for Anons to research. On a side note, somebody mentioned the media asking the Question, it hasn't been asked. Q has already clarified this, there is Q and there are Anons, there is no QAnon. The media needs to ask who is Q, and how does he have access to Trump to be able to post what he has posted.
Tippy top is what did it for me.
Well yes, it is real, his messages are on the boards and what not. But I mean "real" in the sense of true, as in "prove what QAnon is saying is true."
What purpose does Q serve in waking up patriots? What exactly have they done other than vote for Republicans and Trump? That doesn't seem like any sort of uprising to me at all, and all this effort will probably fizzle anyways when Trump leaves office. How is it that some of it is predictions when they are in fact things Q claims will happen? He's not even saying maybe it will happen or maybe it won't. That seems like a retroactive attempt to make his narrative work.
Trump already said he doesn't know anything about QAnon (which is the media term for Q; whether it's correct or not is irrelevant, it's clear to see what it's meant for). If Q is the correct term and not QAnon, surely Trump would've been able to put 2 and 2 together and explain what Q was. Or he's dumb?
Trump won't explain what Q is yet - because then he would have to say that when he came in to clear the Swamp he was asked to do so by a military group. He would also need to explain to these dingbats that there have been military operations and an ongoing war with traitors within. How do you think this would play out.? How would the media spin it?
People are NOT voting for Republicans. They despise Republicans too the GOP and DNC are not called The Uniparty for nothing, and all but a handful are as corrupt or complicit as the Dems. They vote for Trump not them because he needs a congress behind him. However they have until recently thwarted him at every turn. They helped with the Senate and judges but aside from that they too have blocked him because of the RINOS. The Dem Party will fall after this, but so will the GOP imo.
And again, Q doesn't 'predict' anything. He makes cryptic statements and asks questions. If the Anons research and come to certain conclusions then it can spread like wildfire. "Such a thing might happen on X day because A, B, C seem to line up so I'm personally convinced this could be significant." Before you know it that personal speculation has traveled around the Twitterverse and become a Q Prediction when it never was.
Sometimes he does strongly imply something will happen in a certain period however, but a) we know he gives disinfo so the enemy reading will expend their energy and b) what he/they thinks are a significant happening may not be the same to us who are not behind the scenes.
When Anons got pissed nothing was happening Q got obviously angry and gave a huge list of all the CEOs who had recently abruptly resigned (as well as all the politicians who abruptly decided to retire from office and not run again). To him/them they were extremely significant but to anons who are expecting major arrests, it was a bit blah.
He did say the first major arrest would shock the world and bring everyone together and we are still waiting.
You are also wrong that when Trump is out of power it will all be forgotten and things will go back to normal. People know too much now and they CANNOT act as if they are ignorant again.
So it really does come down to Trump either clears the Swamp, they are dealt with severely, or the people will have no choice but to do it themselves imo.
But you do you.
He predicted McCains death thats a huge one. He said no name would be returning to the news. Also predicted flynn would be freed eventually and the total number of senate seats for Republicans after the 2018 election. There is all research threads on Q proofs alone.
McCain was old and had cancer, and had already fallen a few times that year. If Q gets points for saying a dying old man will die, then I should get points for saying that someone who is terminally ill will also die.
Flynn being pardoned could've been easily foreseen. Trump pardons people in his inner circle to reward them and stoke his base. Conservative media was already calling for a pardon and Trump basically does whatever they suggest.
The number of senate seats for Republicans could've been ascertained by simply viewing poll numbers. (Sidenote: if there's so much election fraud, how is it that Republicans retained the Senate in 2018?)
Can you elaborate on the "no name" claim? Who is no name?
"no name" aka John McCain.
Ah I see, well he is a senator so maybe he would be in the news lmao
He really had the most remarkable cancer. Most people who have his type of cancer are dead in a few months. They also lose cognition long before then, Except for McCain he kept going right till the last moment with full faculties.
Maybe they have some advanced drugs they haven't shared with the rest of us to make McCain's brain cancer so exceptional.
McCain was executed. Q posted:
And then McCain died I believe within hours of International Dog Day, more than a month later.
You are not sincere, you are an obstacle.
We are not blind.
Obvious shill is obvious. You asked what proves Q is “real” (that’s not how Q works), yet you argue every single person that gives tons of examples to Q’s legitimacy. What the hell is the point of even coming here asking that if you’re already dead set with what you believe?
I meant "real" as in "true." I don't just believe anything, especially if it collapses under the a bit of scrutiny.
https://lbry.tv/@DannyQarma:9/Qproofs:8
Maybe I'll watch that and get back but can you specifically point anything out personally? If you're sending it I assume you've seen it so can you go ahead and argue yourself why it is that QAnon is real?
Whip people up into a frenzy while ignoring evidence.
Is this your play? Or just too stupid to follow?
Too complex to just explain. It is a great watch though.
Sudden influx of trolls is sudden.
Q said the question would be resolved when the media asked Trump about Q.
Hey, ive read a few comment responses and just wanted to keep it simple. I know you came here for some proofs, and Q has gone through a phase of posting what you may call proofs in different forms such as timestamps within impossible deltas(before a whitehouse/Potus post), photos from places neckbeards dont operate, and some uncanny predictions that most anons probably didnt catch until after the event "news unlocks previous posts. etc.
My point is, instead of having some arguments here with people who probably cant mash 4 years of details that are readily available for you, just go through the posts and see what you think. Your opinion would be interesting to hear vs claiming here to people that saw it there was no attempts from Q to prove he is "connected".
Its not easy for most people to digest half of Q, like some have said not all posts are for anons/public. My best advice is to realize most of what Q posts makes no sense at first read, but time unlocks its meaning which gives most credence to the posts. Good luck, its alot of sleepless nights and rabbitholes but you may find its not breeding radicals, but breeding people who think for themselves.
Be skeptical, even anons get it wrong too, this is the way.
I really have read a lot of the posts and I'm not convinced. I'm here to hear it from Q believers, who should be able to provide reasons of why they believe this. This is not some sort of personal journey, it's something that can be proven or disproven. So the fact that Q believers cannot provide their reasons for following says more about QAnon than Q could ever say.
I would say that people calling for the U.S. military to be deployed on U.S. soil is fairly radical, just saying. Listening to Q is not thinking for yourself, rather it's following an alternative narrative.
I would say to that, look at Q less like some information source, giving some kind of orders to his followers. Look at him more like someone doing the opposite. The point of his posts over the four years prepares people to just disect the media and what they are told. He never asks for you to believe what he/they post. Thats not the point of it. Anons are just people who dig past the narrative, and Q has shown a huge contrast between what information is being supressed over the last 4 years. Its like a headache remembering every debunked or false story. Its like a wakeup call to do your own research.
I have a feeling you think Q is the predictor and all he says must come true, but he doesnt predict, he questions which leads Anons to dig. Im not sure if thats nefarioust to some, but to me its made me go from believing everything i hear and parroting it to, watching hours of comittees and comparing to the media spin. THAT is the purpose of Q. Do you need proof he has succeeded?
to be fair it wasnt Q who had me thinking there are satanic pedophiles in the world, thats not exactly a new development, but your missing the point, PROOF was never a part of the deal of following Q. If thats what you want, the best youll find is proof Q has some connection to Trumps team, whether hes right about things is for either time to tell or you to discern through digging.
I like talking to people who dont believe Q and the same trend is that they heard about Qanon from the media or someone elses opinion and want to look at it through that angle that Q is a leaker.
Leaking would be pretty illegal for a Q intel wouldnt it? So what other methods to bypass media are necessary. Socrates was a smart dude. I believe intel is buried in the complexity of Qposts however, on the surface all it is, is breadcrumbs of mostly public info, pointing out areas that people who do the digging will focus on. Then the digs surface through various supressed means.\
Questions with no answers, thats not leaking info. Understanding the purpose of Q- and the anon process will better your understanding of Q. Rather then saying he must prove info cuz some radical follower predicts something incorrect.
"Disinformation was necessary" was an early Qpost I never forgot, dont trust everything Q posts, the only proof is what you discover to be true.
It would be illegal to just say things outright, but wouldn't it be equally concerning if someone was leaking information that led people to the same conclusions? And if Q's posts don't do that, literally what is the point? Like I said, you don't have to be a Q follower to know that not everything the media says is true.
The "disinformation was necessary" honestly just seems like an attempt to cover his ass. Which is more likely: that Q is a government insider who's trying to keep a supposedly all-powerful government off him while trying to leak information (via clues) to the public or that Q is a liar, not a government insider, and he's just saying that to stop people from saying he was lying (because he was)?
well just to play along, one interesting thing i noticed was the phrase "Nothing Can Stop What is Coming" - posted in Nov 2018, nothing more then a phrase to me at the time. Fast Forward to election 2020 NCWIS - https://www.cisa.gov/safecom/NCSWIC becomes relevant and Q reminds us this was not just a catchphrase. Whoever Q is, that's an interesting release of info 2 years before its relevancy, like many other posts that all point to 2020 election time.
Feel free to tell me how that it doesnt matter, the CISA director Chris Krebs and another official was ousted by Trump recently. Possibly Q knew this was going to occur or maybe hes just really lucky.
Following clues??? Learning to learn...do your research!
There are plenty of videos showing "Q Proofs" which show a lot of the "coincidences" (how many coincidences until it's mathematically impossible?) in relation to what Q said in drops before Trump tweets using the same key words/phrases. Among other things.
It's not hard for anybody with an honest curiosity to simply go search for these instead of expecting people to go through explaining such a detailed operation within just a few posts, it's ridiculous. Do your own research, that's a large part of it.
I kind of have though. I just want to see what the Q followers think and rebut if I think the explanation is not sufficient. I'll concede that it's getting increasingly boring though.
That's intriguing but that doesn't mean a whole lot. First of all, Parscale (Trump's campaign manager) admitted that they would monitor sites like r/The_Donald for content to tweet and view so they could remain in touch with their base. That could mean that Trump was simply tweeting something similar so that he could keep his base invested (he knows of QAnon, despite what he claims, and he actively fans its flames because they love him).
In any case, were the tweets verbatim or did they have "keywords"? Because if they just had "keywords" that's kind of pointless, might as well break out the red arrows and circles and start taping newspapers to your wall then.
Here's my take:
Q is the PR guy (or gal) for a group (Military Intelligence, in my opinion) who claims that the country is being sold out by nefarious actors. The "Great Awakening" is the process by which Q engages the public to generate awareness of these actors and their "crimes against humanity."
We can argue ad infinitum about the details and whether or not predictions came true. But what we cannot escape is the fact that... to be true, SOMETHING must happen. And in my opinion, that something has to be pretty damn big.
I thought that Trump would blow this out of the water in October. When that didn't happen, I thought that he would win the election in a(n undisputed) landslide. When that didn't happen, I thought that I needed to stop moving my goal posts and ask myself what needs to happen for me to be "right" about Q.
At this point, I don't honestly know. In my mind, it's possible that Trump could allow Biden to be Inaugurated in order to reveal the plan of the Deep State to further restrict our freedoms and usher in the One World Government run by Lucifarian Pedophiles. My mind also understands how absolutely bat shit crazy that sounds.
All of the above is presented to you to give you my foundational reasoning for the real answer to your (supposedly legit) question:
I can't prove that Q is real. I believe that future events will prove Q to be real, but I can't prove that either. Furthermore, I don't believe it's my job to prove that Q is real. I believe that responsibility lies with Q. And for me, Q has (thus far) led me to believe that SOMETHING will happen.
With that being said... I am approaching the point where I may not be able to justify moving my own goal posts anymore. I know for certain that I will not be able to look back 10 years from now and wistfully remark "oh man, remember that one time when Q almost changed the course of western civilization? That was some good shit."
Either it happens or it doesn't.
Well I will say I do appreciate your candidness in sharing.
I think that if somebody idenitifies with Q that's similar to say, identifying with a religion, so therefore if you believe everything they say you believe they are real and true so you have to prove that (not saying you as in you but a hypothetical person who would be indentifying with Q).
I understand that picking out specific examples kind of seems like cherrypicking but at the same time, if those examples have been proven incorrect then that really does muddy the water on what exactly is supposed to be believed and what isn't. And if, for example, Q is suddenly proven to not be a government insider (which is up in the air because I don't think he's ever attempted to prove it) then that's pretty big and everything he said would fall apart.
I can see how you're kind of split on it after Q's claims about the election didn't come to pass and that you're kind of tracking it at the same time to see if anything happens. I would like to just say that if something Q does say truly happens, maybe think about it. If Q says, for example, that John McCain was going to die, maybe that was going to happen anyways (seeing as he had cancer before Q predicted this)? And that's an old example but the point is still there. Maybe you already know that though. You seem rational compared to others I've talked to who just... aren't really, maybe they're not all there.
I'm not saying Q is absolutely fake, I can't prove absolutely that he isn't a government insider. On the other hand, it's on Q to prove that to me before I believe him (he has the burden of proof after all). Right now I'm saying that there's a 99 percent chance this is fake. But keep searching for yourself. I don't mean to put myself in an authoritative position or be the one giving you advice but it seems like you're on a good path right now.
Here is what I say to all my QHating friends and family:
I am prepared, both mentally and emotionally, to be wrong. Are you?
That's a fair question. Some people just don't believe Q reflexively, but I think it's best to be prepared that you could be wrong, even if that's not likely.
there's like a 2 hour long Q proof video, way too many coincidences to be a larp.
Way too much opposition to be a larp.
And anyone who says Q has always been wrong - is wrong.
what proves YOU are real?
what proves God is real?
what proves consciousness is real?
RE-READ THE DROPS
start here:
Ah I meant "real" in the sense of "true", not in the sense of literally real.
Follow your heart.
You make your own reality.
If you are full of love, you are close to the ultimate truth, think about it.
Choose wisely, Q is like anything sublime, hard to grasp with your will, but easy to embrace their WISDOM.
This is not a HW lame screenplay. This is our next evolutionary step as a whole.
Behind every "truth" is a mystery, always.
Re-read the drops and find it in your own heart, by yourself.
In short I could say Q is real cos Q EXISTS.
But finding THE TRUTH, my fellow human, is the very reason to be ALIVE.
You are very welcome to ride with us, we are also seeking the Grail.
There are things, fren, that are bigger than words.
In your post you say that your question is whether Q is real, yet it seems more like you know they are real...you just think they are wrong a lot.
I am also wrong a lot, yet I am real.
Just take the Q posts for what they are. Information for you to think about for yourself.
Why don't you give that a try.
Besides, nothing can stop what is coming.
No matter what you or I or anybody else here believes.
Be well.
I definitely don't think Q is "real" (in the sense of truthfulness). I don't believe anything is coming, but if it is I guess I'll find out.
Q said the question would be resolved when the media asked Trump about Q.
Yes but they already have asked Trump about QAnon and all he had to say was "I don't know a lot but they seem to like me very much." That answers seemingly nothing about the question and doesn't prove QAnon is real at all.
You left out an important part, when the reporter said that the QAnon theory was that Trump was fighting against a global ring of satanic pedophile cannibals Trump replied “so would that be a good thing or a bad thing?”
That's not a key part at all. Do you really expect anyone to say anything different? Nobody would say it's a bad thing that a Satanic pedophile cult is being fought, the problem is that it's not real.
The issue with Q is not about proof or disproof. Q posted things that already were plucking ideas that people had and asked people to think for themselves about them. Some of these led to very fruitful investigations. Others leave a lot of people scratching their heads. And sometimes we find that the stuff we were scratching our heads about suddenly makes a whole lot of sense like "these people are sick" and COVID-19.
The people who followed up on these things found facts that resonated with the things that were being said. The people who assumed Q was some kind of "divine revelation" found out that there was one point of data that they couldn't square and soon decided to ignore it entirely and mock the people who were still following up on the ideas.
This is the issue here. The Deep State glowies know full well that "plausible deniability" prevents anything of this kind from being released that is empirically provable. National Security and legal proceedings prevent any "provable" disclosures from ever being released to the public at this point under penalty of criminal or military prosecution.
So, let's look at something we, Joe Q Public, can really see. Like the election. People who are watching see a whole lot of statistical anomalies and allegations of inconsistency. All these convenient associations with Dominion. But here's the cigar butt... All of this is stuff that needs to be proven in a court. And SOMEONE somewhere is going to find some kind of "plausible deniability" for all of it. The existence of a counterpoint doesn't imply falsehood or truth. It simply implies that the interpretation of the facts are able to be contested.
But what is really being drawn out is the motive. Why contest the people trying to ensure the election is fair? We can only assume corruption. But could we ever PROVE it? That's the entire point of this exercise.
The criminals love the shill mantra of "PROVEITPROVEITPROVEIT" because it's a cover for people even LOOKING at the problem. Oh, it's all just "debunked" and "discredited" you're a loony conspiiiiiracy theorist. Oh excuse me. Who is the one blindly wearing a mask, ignoring known treatments like HCQ, and letting socialists take their freedoms in the name of "health safety"?
The issues that Q brings up are issues that bring us to look at the facts and hope that we might even solve the entire crime. Most of the public is too lazy or too brainwashed to care. They believe the stupid television over their own eyes and ears. Q's entire point was to FOLLOW THE FACTS along with a few hints to look at along the way.
It's always valid to ask for proof, there's never a situation when it's not valid, even if that's being asked in bad faith (which you assume). The court cases have netted nothing, proving that the claims of Dominion stealing the vote are meaningless.
Q is making exceptional claims. The burden of proof is wholly on Q and his followers. You can't say no to proof or say just follow the facts (especially when Q is selling facts that aren't really facts at all).
I think it's important to not marry Q with conservatism. You can still be anti-socialist, anti-communist, anti-progressive, etc. and not be a Q follower. Also, HCQ is definitely not a known treatment (Trump did not take it when he was at Walter Reed, I wonder why that is?). Maybe people wear masks because they know that, even though they won't die, they might spread the disease to someone vulnerable who could die?
Incorrect. A legal case where good faith has demonstrated a problem even though the burden of proof is not feasible shifts the burden of proof to the defense. Probatio diabolica.
A pattern of irregularities this vast is enough to warrant investigation of Biden’s ability to prove he got this fairly.
But shills ignore this point. Don’t they?
As far as HCQ, my friend is a former biomedical research scientist. He’s cross referencing the journals and the studying that are not being paid for by contrary interests conclude HCQ is safe and valid. Science is not immune to the problem of human nature: bribes and false ideologies cover up undesirable facts with misrepresentation and false datasets. Pressed for time so I’ll cut off there but you’re not off the hook.
Did I ask about burden of proof in legal cases? Most of the time that's not even a probatio diabolica because Q literally claims things that turn out to be false, so that's just outright false. And bringing up probatio diabolica doesn't help your case at all because you're trying to explain why you believe in Q, remember? Not why he could be right or could be wrong.
You would have to prove that there's any pattern of irregularities before you go forward with the ability to investigate, which is something that Trump's legal team is yet to prove. The Carone hearing was literally a joke.
Don't give a fuck if I'm on the hook or not, you've done a poor job of proving any point. I don't care if your friend is in science or medicine or not or whether he's said HCQ works because that's not been proven in the medical community at all. Answer my question: if HCQ works, why did Trump not take it?
The point of discussing that is to set forth a comparable example to my point so that I can demonstrate your unreasonable and invalid demands in your accusation which claims that we cannot prove Q is genuine.
The fact of the matter is very simply established in acknowledging that Q himself has admitted to being a source of disinformation sometimes. Given this, we cannot treat Q as a "knight who never lies." At best, Q is sometimes truthful and sometimes false. But that's true of any person we are talking to. Therefore, it is immaterial to use as a disproof. But it is a perfectly valid statement to reinforce an understanding of trustworthiness because it admits that Q is capable of "error."
Your unreasonable demand is that you are demanding that Q always present truth to be considered "authentic." This is impossible for any being with imperfect knowledge as Q logically seems to be. Therefore, the fact that Q sometimes doesn't pan out in predictions doesn't make Q false nor does it presume Q is truthful either.
What does commend Q as a truthful example is the fact that when we correlate the data that we have sanitized from Q's statements it corresponds to a valid picture of the events going on in the world. Therefore, it is a valid counterpresentation to a narrative given to us by the known "knights who lie to us nearly all the time" that we know the Mainstream Media to have become. Using imperfect to balance imperfect to create a more comprehensive picture of the situation. Just as one uses the left eye and the right eye to create a stereoscopic picture of the surrounding area.
Your assertion demands an impossibility: Proving someone who specifically said that some of their information was false is speaking truth sometimes. The burden of proof, therefore, should be flipped. We've demonstrated by our Q "breads" that Q has tangible data that is worthwhile for us. You, however, have not demonstrated that Q has no tangible data nor have you demonstrated why we should invalidate Q's tangible data that we have found. What motive have you to invalidate these "breads?"
Your mockery of Trump's attempt to demonstrate the election is invalid seems to give a motive for your activities. You seem rather enthusiastic about the possibility that Trump won't be able to win. Is that because you are against Trump?
We weren't given this information so there's no need to speculate. His doctors chose Remdesivir and Regeneron for whatever reason their medical expertise dictated. That doesn't prove or disprove anything about HCQ other than the fact Trump did not use it for himself.
With regards to HCQ, the issue isn't about Trump anyway. Trump may have informed us about it but this is something that we have done our own independent research about. (At least I know I and my friends have) As we have actively researched the claims about HCQ we found them to be quite promising. HCQ is a Zinc ionophore that disrupts the reproduction of viruses and coupled with Zinc it is one possible mechanism of disrupting Coronavirus.
The historical use of HCQ is demonstrable and backed up by many studies. Yet, the studies that suddenly have come out "debunking HCQ" all seem to have appeared QUITE recently and are almost always tied to some financial benefit from some institution we've traced to be likely involved in misinforming the public. HCQ has been used since the 1940s and it's got one of the best safety records out there. Before Corona hit, it was used to treat Lyme Disease and MS. But suddenly it's the worst drug ever according to the Big Pharma corporate science. Coincidence? Not really. Money talks bullshit walks. The fact of the matter is that it is an option in the arsenal of people trying to help themselves fight the virus. Why should it be such a bugbear? What's so dangerous about letting people do their own research and come to their own conclusions?
At any rate, our basic problem is this: Military hides truth. Government hides truth. Media hides truth. People hide truth from themselves. If you are looking to treat Q or Trump as "knights who never lie" then you're clearly ignorant of reality. You cannot handle Q like a logic puzzle where one contradiction is the end of the analysis. If you do that you're kind of dumb because NOBODY is perfectly consistent in life. That's just fact.
You seem to want to treat the universe like it's a grand accident that somehow generated a huge Sudoku puzzle for man to solve by the use of his almighty reason. From my perspective, that's what's baloney....
If Q is the source who lies occasionally, is that really a source then? It seems to me that if he admits upfront that he lies occasionally then that could potentially be something set up to cover him when he gets something wrong. I know people can't be right all the time, but that's pretty sketchy that he can just say "that was just disinformation" and people keep believing. You're saying balance the medias lies with Q's lies but that's not really happening because people who believe Q almost always say the media is lying (especially because the two conflict each other a lot). That's not really a balance.
I also don't know where to throw this but I find it particularly interesting that Q is a "government insider" who makes predictions about when John McCain is going to die (for example).
I know that Q could technically be truthful (even if that's an unlikelihood), but I'm taking the neutral position here. It's incorrect to assume I'm trying to disprove a claim that can't really be disproven. Q's information only makes sense when you remove most of what he says which is false, so that's not helpful at all.
I have no ulterior motive in pointing out Trump's legal failures over the election, but I equally have no appetite to indulge in a false reality. Based on what Trump's legal team has shown us thus far (and how the courts have reacted), he will not prevail in his election challenges.
I'm not saying that HCQ doesn't work, I'm saying it hasn't been proven to work. The Trump point was kind of just saying that if he advocated it so strongly why did he not take it. The debunking of HCQ was not of the drug itself but rather of the claims that it fights COVID, and I only ever remember reading stuff that said the claim was unproven but not false. It's in the interest of the government and researchers to debunk this claim because it could have unintended side effects. I don't think there's a media vendetta against it however- were that the case, why would they let Remdesivir and Regeneron be released?
If people can't be right all the time, it's obvious that any potential "source" would be susceptible to that problem wouldn't they? Unless you posit some kind of Divine revelation that was immune to that you'd have to conclude that there was no valid "source" at all. In which case why would you acknowledge anything as facts? Down that road lies the insanity of willful ignorance.
You act as if the only reason people oppose the MSM is Q. The MSM is falsely depicting all manner of things that can be seen even from people's lived experiences. Such as the lived experiences of workers who lost their jobs to Obama and Biden's economies exporting jobs to China.
Do you really think Q is the reason for all this? Really?
The MSM claims white people are racist beyond measure these days and the only cure is "checking privilege." Yet another data point they are blowing out their rectal holes. How about how bringing in migrants into Europe is "safe" and they don't murder people and commit rapes? Must I continue down the train of falsehoods that the MSM represents? And all of that doesn't rely one lick on Q's claims.
Q came into a fruitful environment where people already agree with 90% of what he says. It's merely a reinforcement of the existing rejection of the corporate globalist narrative by the people themselves who see it as a sack of shit.
Interesting you want to drag another discussion thread into this. Q was definitely talking smack about McCain but that obviously isn't a certain proof. It's a possible interpretation that MI was involved with some circumstantial evidence but no real proof. As most of this is, honestly.
And the assumption that this is just about the legal cases is also misplaced. Q opened the door to considering the possibility the Military might get involved at some point. The cases themselves reinforce this point as some of the witnesses and lawyers are directly tied to people Q already made us aware of like General Flynn and the Military Intelligence crowd. Not proof, but definitely an open possibility we consider that those who reject Q don't normally even consider an option and assume that Biden is just going to steal it all without consequences.
You keep going back to this proof thing as though it's something we can even hope to do in this environment. The corruption in this world has already set the system so that truth and falsehood are so impossible to discern that we have to resort to these mechanisms of imperfect analysis.
I can give a decent speculation given the data I have seen. Remdesivir is backed by one of their big people. (George Soros is an investor) People being encouraged to use it would benefit these backers. I found it rather unsettling Trump chose to use it but I perceived it as a convenient concession. What they don't cover are the drawbacks I've seen to Remdesivir. The omission is just as telling here as it was to HCQ. HCQ is not patented. Soros and his allies get nothing from it. And it's not just from this that I infer the pattern here. There's an article where a banking investor was quoted as saying "how can we make a profit from it" as well as a patter of Rockefeller suppression of alternative cures that demonstrate a degree of effectiveness.
The net picture seems to be: 1. Soros gets a cut, so Trump is allowed to use it without criticism. 2. The doctors are trained by that system. 3. The media won't suppress the info or create a buzz criticizing it.
This is the other thing you need to get. We're not playing a game of mere antagonism. We're seeing their rules confirmed in the world as we propose different "moves" and they show their "countermoves." If the move is one they seem to "like" it's one they "encourage." If the move is one they don't seem to "like" there is a clear pattern of discouragement. And the effects are eminently reproducible on multiple occasions. Trump chooses more often than not options that they "don't like" and we see a corresponding degree of animosity from the organs and instruments of this system in application.
What is being shown here is not, then, a single claim but a system of claims that correspond to an overall picture. The Deep State being invested in a grossly anti-American, anti-freedom and anti-human narrative that is based on Chinese style "corporate socialism."
I don't think it's far-fetched to say that a lot of what Q has said is either overtly vague and not worthwhile or false, so weighing him as an unreliable source is fair. Before we can even ascertain whether what he says is true or false though, he has not even provided reason to believe him in the first place. Credible sources establish credibility by being verified in what they are a source of.
I'm repeating what you are saying in that quote, not claiming that everyone who is skeptical of the MSM are Q followers. Nothing I said suggested that was the case, so that's an especially tangential argument. And while the MSM lies sometimes, it doesn't help to replace them with an alt-narrative: that's not thinking for yourself or rejecting the narrative, it's trading one narrative for another.
It's not that interesting that I want to use an example.
Seeing as Q is not a verified source in military intelligence, that doesn't seem a possibility at all. And of course people who don't believe Q wouldn't consider a military coup as an option. They especially wouldn't hold out hope for it, seeing as (I previously mentioned) Trump's legal team has failed time and again to procure evidence that the election was stolen. Screaming it from the rooftops does not make it so.
Then I guess the HCQ argument just comes down to whether you believe that Pharma companies and the government are credible or not. I still don't understand the argument though. If HCQ is profitable for businesses, why would they not try to get people on board with that?
Obviously businesses are trying to get profit from it, so again, if HCQ is unpatented, why are businesses not pouncing? If the FDA approves it, the media doesn't matter because public perception will flip immediately.
There's obviously a sort of aristocracy when it comes to the people at the top 1 percent, but I don't understand why you're trying to find Deep State in everything (based entirely on speculation). It seems like your default assumption is that the Deep State is involved when the opposite should be true
Q said the question would be resolved when the media asked Trump about Q.