I'm requesting advice from the old-timers regarding topics on this board NOT promoted/mentioned by Q. I apologize for the long post but I think this is important for those who are in my same predicament regarding Q-research vs conspiracy theories that harm our noble goals.
I retired from a 60 hr/wk job at the beginning of 2020. COVID hit w/in a couple of weeks and I was pissed that a lot of my plans were ruined. I had a feeling COVID was a hoax so I started researching COVID specifically since I had a lot of free time. I heard mention of "Q" a couple of times in 2019 but had no idea what "Q" was. Fast forward to 2020 and I start running across videos on YouTube that mention Q. Ahhh..OK. I branched into watching a lot of those as well. I ended up getting red-pilled too quickly but after a few weeks I started thinking...some of these people in the videos are full of shit.
I shut off YouTube, quit going to all the kook sites, grabbed a notebook, and started reading all the Q-drops from #1-present day while researching the drops specifically and taking notes. Then it all clicked. I soon confirmed to myself that many of the people making those videos never read a damn thing Q said or grossly misinterpreted/embellished things. I could see the big picture overall. I did not need or care so much about proofs, dates, etc. If anything, the Q-drops presented themselves to me as one bad-ass study guide about why things are the way they are. Cool.
I could not use social media for the past twenty years. I was a cop and my former Sheriff had a team of snitches that would actually search out employees' Facebooks and social media and then discipline them for "inappropriate comments" or even "liking" someone else's comment that they deemed "inappropriate". (Remember that old Planet of the Apes meme that looked like Valerie Jarrett? My buddy ended up on the local news and was suspended for several months for clicking "like" on that meme b/c they said it was "racist".) I can't keep my mouth shut so I never participated in any forum or social media until very recently. I am thankful I stayed away from social media for most of my life b/c I soon realized how retarded and gullible many people can be. Especially the group-thinkers. I would seriously be dooming right now otherwise.
B/c I researched the Q-drops independently, my brain was not corrupted by everyone's "hopium", "doom", and other dumb shit. B/c of this, I have no doubt the Biden Admin will be short for this earth. I don't care about the timeline, Q pointed me in the right direction, I researched, I know Q will sometimes purposely give misinfo, and I feel Trump/Q made the right moves that will eventually make everything right. No problem there. I got the 40,000 foot view and I have felt I was months ahead of any news outlet to the point I cringed when they finally reported on something that many of us had known forever. (And I have only been researching Q for about a year now.) Yall get the point.
Here's my problem. I need some advice from the old-timers that have been around from the beginning or earlier:
B/c I looked at Q primarily through my own research and never actively participated in forums, chans, kun, etc., I was surprised to see a lot of people on this board talking about the same fantastical things that Q never ever mentions, or if Q mentions it at all, it is rather vague. Here are a few examples:
NESARA/GESARA: This crowd always goes on about the utopia to come. I have never seen Q mention it once. Q mentioned the gold standard coming back. Q hints at making the banking system less centralized and more fair. I never saw a single drop mention NES/GES. All those NES/GES sites either try to sell you gold & silver and/or have a New Age theme to them. My observations/pattern recognition. Am I missing something obvious?
The latest one I have seen popping back up with a vengeance around here is the CORPORATION OF THE UNITED STATES crowd. Almost 5,000 drops and I never heard Q mention this one time. Q mentions the Vatican / City of London / DC. Sure. But not "ADMIRALITY LAW" and "CONSTITUTION OF EIGHTEEN-SEVENTYwhatever". I ran across it a few times early on while researching other stuff. What I noticed is 5 different people/articles/vids will give you ten different explanations. I see Q constantly posting about restoring the Constitution but never about this stuff. These sites usually don't have the New Age themes as much but they still try to sell you some precious metals. Am I missing something obvious?
I have seen a lot of people claiming to be "Q-supporters/podcasters" talking about miracle medicinal cure-alls and regeneration machines. (When Trump gets back in we will have no more cancer on earth.) When the f*ck did Q mention this? Did I miss something? Q hinted that RBG might have been kept alive longer by medicines not available to the public. Q even mentioned (I believe) the possibility of eventually seeing alternative advanced forms of energy. Q even vaguely hinted at extra-terrestrial life but only because of the vastness of the universe. Nothing specific. However, I see a bunch of people falling for the Robert David Steele types. I like to keep an eye on some of these guys and I'll force myself to watch some of their videos. Amongst a lot of other BS, Steele once claimed that we are sending kids to Mars on a "twenty year ride" to work as off-planet slaves. Really? Come on. Don't even get me started on all those YouTubers/podcasters (including Steele) that constantly have inside info and "un-named sources". That shit pisses me off and I see people fall for it left and right. My friend sent me a Simon Parks vid recently and I instantly sent him back the "alien mother" vid with the reply: "Really. You believe this guy?"
For you long-time researchers (Q-researchers), am I way off here or are some people just gullible and/or filled on too much "hopium"? On one hand I feel my personal research benefited by not engaging much in forums/chans/social media. It certainly helped me not to fall into the "doomer crowd". I quickly realized that if lot of those "doomers" read even a fraction of Q's posts, they would be feeling pretty good right now. On the other hand, did I do myself a disservice by going out of my way to avoid the opinions of others?
Disclaimer In no way am I attacking this forum. There are a lot of really bright folks on here. It just seems that for every nugget of gold, I end up running across 10 pounds of sh*t. :) I'm all in on the plan. I just think it would help if more people actually read it.
Thoughts?
Also, another quick one on the current Constitution for USA Inc. vs. the American Republic.
Q references RESTORING Old Glory (#4469, #3907, #2437 and #2436).
Old Glory was a nickname for our flag at a time when we were still under the original Constitution. It was abolished in 1871 with the Act that created our new Constitution.
In Q post #3907 and #2436 (#3907 is a report of #2436) Q states: This is about restoring OLD GLORY. Later in the post Q says: We are UNITED in these STATES OF AMERICA.
The reason that last statement is important is the original Constitution was not called "The Constitution of the United States", which was the version implemented AFTER the Act of 1871. The original Constitution was in fact titled: "Constitution of the United States of America." THE was not in the title and OF AMERICA was dropped. You can see this subtle change by referencing the third paragraph of the Bill of Rights to see EXACTLY what our Founding Fathers called the Consitution.
In Q #2437, Q clearly states: RETURN OLD GLORY TO HER FORMER STATE. Now, what would the 'former state' of Old Glory be? The Constitution BEFORE the 1871 Act changes that made us USA Inc.
Q post #4469 explains what Old Glory meant in an example of the Civil War. Q refers to it as 'The Flag of Lincoln." Why is this. Because work for the ratification began under Lincoln's successor, Andrew Johnson, and was completed and signed into law by Ulysses S. Grant (the 18th and last President of the American Republic).
So, in a nutshell when asked about the previous Republic Constitution vs. USA Inc. this is where it comes from.
I’ll just throw this out there. My opinion only. If we were a CORPORATION like many say, and are controlled by a small group of elites in London or whatever, why can’t we just give them the finger and move on? You don’t think Trump couldn’t have Soros/Rothschilds/others eliminated in the blink of an eye if he deemed it so? If the Vatican or City of London held as much power as we are told, would it be logical to just stop cooperating? They have no military power over us. We could make our economy recover much more effectively than they could. I’ll admit that I am not fully educated on these topics but I feel they are blown out to be bigger than they are. I think they have enormous influence but not total control. I’ll eat humble pie if I learn otherwise.
Trump is definitely a Constitutionalist. This is more than about the world powers that seek to enslave us. The current structure in the US actually FLIPPED what the Founding Fathers had established.
The Federal Government was meant to have VERY little power. In fact, the power of the Feds was meant to be less than that of the States. The best way to think of it was that the states were the power and the Feds were the "shared services" that would make all of it hold together.
Trump aims to restore the power structure the way it was meant to be - thus why he let the states handle their approach to the "scandemic".
The problem with the structure our Founding Fathers established, was that it would make it difficult for a private central bank to assume control. This was very intentional.
As you dig into this you will learn our original Constitution had THREE documents - the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the Continental Congressional Clauses. The last bit there is very hard to find information anywhere and I only know about them from a research project in 1985 looking into some old books on American Political History.
There is a reason Q once told us to look at a history book from 20 years ago, 10 years ago and five years ago. I took more away from this post than most, I guess, because of the deep research I did in 1985 and was shocked to learn we had an additional document to the Constitution.
You see, this document severely limited the powers of the Governments in America.
Some examples of what is contained in these clauses:
1.) The Marines - Remember when Q asked us the purpose of the Marines and who they report to. Well, they were created by the Founding Fathers with the sole purpose of defending against piracy on land or sea (defined as government officials using their position to loot or benefit from the looting of the public treasury), which was listed as the highest form of treason, and against treason itself. Yes, folks, the Marines were created to be the watchdogs against government crime and corruption. The thought being that any citizen could join the Marines and thus put themselves in a position to guard against government corruption.
2.) Limitations on Taxation - The clauses specifically forbid any government (local, state of federal) from taxing income or property. Look where we are today and now you know why this document had to disappear with the Banking Act of 1871. This was setup to PREVENT bankers and rulers from stealing from the people. While the Constitution says Congress has the power to tax, the Clauses specifically say on imports from foreign countries only.
3.) Penalties for Treason - I mentioned the causes of treason above, the penalties were: one offense - immediate removal of citizenship and banishment and removal from US soil. Two of more offenses - Death. There is no alternative for prison as they wanted people afraid of treason.
4.) Bill of Rights Amendments - Congress was forbidden for making any changes to the Bill of Rights that changed government policy (such as the 16th and 17th Amendments). The purpose of this was that the Founding Fathers knew the danger of allowing the Government to be in charge of how they operate.
5.) Manet In Aeternum - This is the most important. These clauses were listed as being eternal and NEVER allowed to be modified or changed. You can see how this was the big stickler for the central banks to seize control and why the modified Constitution had to come into existence.
Barring the previous examples I gave, the burying of this document gave way to the most dynamic changing Amendment to our governmental structure - the 17th Amendment - where we since then have voted Senators in like Congressional Representatives.
Notice now there is no difference in the House or the Senate in how things are done. This was NEVER meant to be but the bankers needed it to seize control of our country. Prior to the 17th Amendment, Senators were appointed by the state and party affiliation never mattered because they were basically glorified errand people, If a law was passed in the House, the Senators would take it back to their state to be voted on in a manor consistent with the state laws. Some states would put a vote to the people, others may simply have their state legislatures vote. Whichever way the state did it, however, the Senators simply came back to Washington and voted how their state decided.
Do you see why this was a problem for the bankers? They could bribe Senators to vote how they wanted, but it was impossible to bribe every state legislature or citizen. It is no coincidence that right after the Federal Reserve Act was passed the 16th and 17th Amendments (which, if you really do research on were illegally ratified = do you really think the States approved of losing their power?) were passed.
There is more to this, but this comment has gone long enough. Hopefully I shed a little more light on our current dilemma for fellow Patriots.
There is a big difference in older vs newer history books. I stated this before, but here is an example. Prior to the Civil Rights movement in the 50s and 60s, the causes for the Civil War were mainly about unfair tariffs and taxation implemented on the South. The money collected was spent mostly on Northern infrastructure and Northern cities. During and after the Civil War, the primary cause was all about slavery...period. Don’t even dare say otherwise or you are racist.
You can read hundreds of soldier’s letters from the time period on both sides and you would be hard pressed to find any mentioning slavery. They mainly discussed taxes/tariffs, defending the Constitution, their state, or protecting their homes from invasion. Slavery was a reason but it was way further down the list than we are taught today.
To your point, the system was rigged one way or another a long time ago.
100% speculation. You are suggesting that we stopped calling the flag OLD GLORY after 1871?
This is what we are talking about. Nice idea ... ZERO proof. Speculation and conjecture only.
I didn't suggest that we stopped calling it that, I referenced Q posts above. It is very clear to anyone with an IQ higher that a cabbage, that when someone says returning something to it's FORMER STATE it means before the state it is currently in.
Vocabulary 101. If you want further proof, do some digging in the dictionary and look up the word FORMER. Since most Anons are fairly intelligent, I didn't think I needed to provide proof of what the word FORMER means.
Finally, I give a detailed explanation above of why it is different today than before 1871 if you are looking for more information.
I'm new to Q. Thanks for the info/confirmation