It's not about accepting being bamboozled or not. It's about censorship. Plain and simple. Frankly, I don't care about George News one way or the other. I care about having the choice to decide if I read it or not.
I am 100% not attached to George News. I've only viewed what others have pointed to. I'm neutral, which actually means open minded. I listen to people who are clearly schemers because as an author, I've always studied people. When you close the doors on things with a permanent thud, you close out truth as well. There is a little truth in every lie. If you are incapable of dividing truth from fiction, then you're going to want to throw out the baby with the bath water.
My only issue with GA and GN is that certain people seem only to want to squelch the rights of other people simply because they have a different take on things. And for the life of me, I can't figure out how that irony is lost on the close-minded.
Last I knew all links to unverified telegrams claiming to have insider status are banned. George got found out, denied any proof, didn't address accusations so they got added to the list. Keep trying to act like its a big deal, legit any discussion is still being had, LINKS TO THEIR FUCKING telegram are banned.
You misunderstand what I'm addressing. The issue is freedom of speech. George News is the catalyst. Freedom of speech requires that one be able to express their ideas and others are able to reject it. I have stated many times that I am 100% NOT standing on the side of George News, but I'm finding it increasingly ironic that many on this forum, which advocates a Great Awakening, are bringing in the tactics of Twatter to close down debate.
In all honesty, if you get away from GA and go to a site like social.quodVerum, you will see the hypocrisy that is rampant here at GA. Intellectually, and apart of the Q boards, they have arrived at what is actually happening in America: devolution. They've shown the evidence. They have arrived at what I consider a very real conclusion. No need to debate it, but the debate is still open for debate there. Many on this board tear down people on social.QuodVerum because of their failure to embrace Q. They cry "shill" at the mention of Thomas Wictor. I find that his analysis backs us Q, but oh no, we can't have anyone arrive at the same conclusion without Q in the picture. No, siree.
But on forums like social.QuodVerum they don't suppress the freedom of speech. They opine and debate. Great Awakening is not a site to opine and debate unless you're all full of "hopium" (can't have anyone express a concern because that's dooming). You can't opine or debate unless you read the boards and have the same conclusion, and the conclusion of at least two moderators is that George News is not Q, therefore, there is no value. God forbid someone go to George News simply to look at pictures. I do agree that trying to link George News to Q is probably a waste of time, but if someone wants to do it, let them. That's called freedom of speech. I've asked a question three times already and apparently no one has been able to answer it. It has been ignored. I'm not asking it again, but I think one conclusion I can come to about the subject is that people are afraid to address the issue because moderators will circle and pick at their carcasses.
I think we sometimes forget that not everything is about Q. Some things just are. But if someone goes to George News OR to Pompeo or to Scavino, it's their prerogative. Here, I'll just say it: If Q said no outside comms, no one needs to be running to Pompeo and Scavino, et al, tweets either. Those our outside comms, but where is the "hopium" in that. Don't bring it up on this forum where suppression of freedom of speech is the norm.
I guess the people who got emotionally invested in George news got super duper invested, huh? For it to be so important to be worth putting each other down for having a different opinion about it.
Different opinion? Are you intentionally being dense or is this normal thinking for you? Evspra’s thread not only destroyed the George narrative but he backed it with proof. Facts and evidence.
If you can't acknowledge the multiple, varied opinions about this matter that have been expressed in several different threads, you are the one being dense. Or closed minded. Arrogant? Whichever. If there weren't varying opinions, there would have been no division. Clearly there has been division and argument, therefore... opinions.
Please so one good reason all their mil vids they posted came from one unknown source that was found and they have not commented on using that material. Think about it. They started talking all Q like a few weeks ago, before that it was "you are loved" be real. go outside.
There us nothing passive aggressive about what i said. Take it as a direct, literal question from someone who doesn't understand the level of importance being given to the current drama.
It's not about accepting being bamboozled or not. It's about censorship. Plain and simple. Frankly, I don't care about George News one way or the other. I care about having the choice to decide if I read it or not.
Holy shit... LINKS TO GN ARE BANNED.
NOT DISCUSSION.
GN LINKS add nothing of content and are a waste of post. It blew my mind how low effort GN related post just shot up to hot.
Your access wasn't blocked. Mods have a right to block garbage from their forums.
so you are saying people can post anything to a Q related only forum? Think.
Everything ??
I am 100% not attached to George News. I've only viewed what others have pointed to. I'm neutral, which actually means open minded. I listen to people who are clearly schemers because as an author, I've always studied people. When you close the doors on things with a permanent thud, you close out truth as well. There is a little truth in every lie. If you are incapable of dividing truth from fiction, then you're going to want to throw out the baby with the bath water.
My only issue with GA and GN is that certain people seem only to want to squelch the rights of other people simply because they have a different take on things. And for the life of me, I can't figure out how that irony is lost on the close-minded.
Last I knew all links to unverified telegrams claiming to have insider status are banned. George got found out, denied any proof, didn't address accusations so they got added to the list. Keep trying to act like its a big deal, legit any discussion is still being had, LINKS TO THEIR FUCKING telegram are banned.
You misunderstand what I'm addressing. The issue is freedom of speech. George News is the catalyst. Freedom of speech requires that one be able to express their ideas and others are able to reject it. I have stated many times that I am 100% NOT standing on the side of George News, but I'm finding it increasingly ironic that many on this forum, which advocates a Great Awakening, are bringing in the tactics of Twatter to close down debate.
In all honesty, if you get away from GA and go to a site like social.quodVerum, you will see the hypocrisy that is rampant here at GA. Intellectually, and apart of the Q boards, they have arrived at what is actually happening in America: devolution. They've shown the evidence. They have arrived at what I consider a very real conclusion. No need to debate it, but the debate is still open for debate there. Many on this board tear down people on social.QuodVerum because of their failure to embrace Q. They cry "shill" at the mention of Thomas Wictor. I find that his analysis backs us Q, but oh no, we can't have anyone arrive at the same conclusion without Q in the picture. No, siree.
But on forums like social.QuodVerum they don't suppress the freedom of speech. They opine and debate. Great Awakening is not a site to opine and debate unless you're all full of "hopium" (can't have anyone express a concern because that's dooming). You can't opine or debate unless you read the boards and have the same conclusion, and the conclusion of at least two moderators is that George News is not Q, therefore, there is no value. God forbid someone go to George News simply to look at pictures. I do agree that trying to link George News to Q is probably a waste of time, but if someone wants to do it, let them. That's called freedom of speech. I've asked a question three times already and apparently no one has been able to answer it. It has been ignored. I'm not asking it again, but I think one conclusion I can come to about the subject is that people are afraid to address the issue because moderators will circle and pick at their carcasses.
I think we sometimes forget that not everything is about Q. Some things just are. But if someone goes to George News OR to Pompeo or to Scavino, it's their prerogative. Here, I'll just say it: If Q said no outside comms, no one needs to be running to Pompeo and Scavino, et al, tweets either. Those our outside comms, but where is the "hopium" in that. Don't bring it up on this forum where suppression of freedom of speech is the norm.
I rarely suggest this but ... PLEASE STICKY THIS.
This post is awesome. Carl was a smart dude.
I guess the people who got emotionally invested in George news got super duper invested, huh? For it to be so important to be worth putting each other down for having a different opinion about it.
Different opinion? Are you intentionally being dense or is this normal thinking for you? Evspra’s thread not only destroyed the George narrative but he backed it with proof. Facts and evidence.
If you can't acknowledge the multiple, varied opinions about this matter that have been expressed in several different threads, you are the one being dense. Or closed minded. Arrogant? Whichever. If there weren't varying opinions, there would have been no division. Clearly there has been division and argument, therefore... opinions.
Please so one good reason all their mil vids they posted came from one unknown source that was found and they have not commented on using that material. Think about it. They started talking all Q like a few weeks ago, before that it was "you are loved" be real. go outside.
There us nothing passive aggressive about what i said. Take it as a direct, literal question from someone who doesn't understand the level of importance being given to the current drama.
?
Sagan always was an overly verbose windbag.
Mark Twain was much more concise and said it better, "It is easier to fool a man than to convince him he had been fooled."
can we move the fuck on already...bunch of sliders here
I don't give a shit about george news. No outside comms, remember. If you want to be a cultist then keep following them.
He's a good example of his principle, even.
Talk about beating a dead horse.... You’re way late to the party. George News internet drama is over. Thanks for trying to start it back.