(from PrayingMeduc)
Transitioning From a Culture of Trusting Others to Trusting Ourselves
The title of this article is bound to raise a few eyebrows. I am not proposing that we should ignore the biblical admonition to trust God. Nor do I intend to argue against the fact that the human heart is deceitful. The narrow question I'll address here is where we get the information we use to understand current events.
For as long as I can remember, I’ve trusted members of the press to investigate current events and report their findings. Recently, I learned that my trust was misplaced. The media have been feeding me half-truths. Having been made aware of this, I began looking for a different source of information.
In 2018, I stumbled upon Q—an anonymous entity who encouraged people to dig through publicly available news articles, videos, and government documents to uncover the truth for themselves.
As I thought about the questions Q asked, and plowed through the linked documents, I learned that the media had been covering up institutionalized corruption.
A new view of the world began taking shape in my mind. Not surprisingly, it was completely different from the model the media portrays.
The Research
Q has posted hints on hundreds of subjects. I learned that I could usually find the truth of a matter if I did a little digging.
Because I didn't have time to research every subject myself, sometimes, I'd look at the work of other researchers (anons). I’d examine their research and conclusions and see if they had connected the dots correctly. If they had, I would share their work with others.
The anons that follow Q have created a sweeping narrative of culture that opposes the one disseminated by society’s corrupt overlords.
A sublime truth emerged from all of this. I realized I didn’t need anyone to tell me how the world works. I discovered that truth for myself by doing my own research. Q merely suggested where I should look for information.
Many people still prefer to get their information from someone else—especially if a source appears to have information not available to the public.
As I've said previously, I'm not interested in sources of information that are not in the public domain. Such information cannot be verified, is easy to fake, and is often proven false at a later time. One cannot build an accurate picture of current events based on rumors and anonymous sources.
We got ourselves into this predicament because we trusted others to tell us the truth and they betrayed us. Many are still betraying us, though we're unaware of it because their claims can neither be verified nor falsified.
I’ve learned (along with millions of anons) that we don’t need others to tell us what’s happening in the world. We can uncover the facts ourselves. And that is the primary goal of Q’s operation. Q did not intend to make us dependent on intelligence insiders for information. He trained us to become citizen journalists—free thinking people who do their own research and come to their own conclusions.
We are, at this moment, transitioning from a time when we trusted in others to tell how the world works to a time when we must trust ourselves.
People often ask how do I know which subjects to focus on and which to ignore. All my research and every Q decode is guided by the Holy Spirit. Although I’ve come to trust my research, it would be useless if not for the guidance of God. When Q says “trust yourself,” he is not telling us to ignore our relationship with God. It is God's Spirit that leads us into all truth.
Think for yourself.
Research for yourself.
Trust yourself.
Clickbait opinions are designed to attract reader to subscribe and/or follow and/or shape a pre-designed narrative.
FOLLOW THE FACTS.
SHEEP NO MORE.
Q
I don’t think scanning any ballot multiple times counts multiple votes. A ballot isn’t just a tally mark for a candidate, it’s a vote connected with a person, a county, and a party.
So if a ballot that says, “John Doe, a Republican from Maricopa County, votes for Donald Trump as POTUS in 2020,” then scanning that ballot over and over again isn’t going to add tallies. It’s just going to be reentering the information that John Doe voted for Trump in 2020 over and over again.
If a ballot could be scanned multiple times to add votes to a candidate, then there would be no point in having any identifying information on a ballot in the first place. And that sort of flaw would not have required an entire forensic audit to uncover.
Seems more likely to me that the ballots just didn’t get scanned correctly the first time. Same thing happened when I worked in libraries and people would get freaked out when I checked a book out to them more than once. No, it’s not checked out to you multiple times, because like a ballot, a library book has a unique ID. It’s not just a tally.
I’m not saying nothing is suspicious and we should accept the party line on everything. But you’re also expecting me to accept that Trump’s observers who were there specifically to gain evidence of wrongdoing did absolutely nothing to record any hard proof they were kicked out. No cell phone video, no recordings. Nothing that proves their story, despite the fact they were there specifically to get that sort of proof.
And if there is ever going to be action taken to rectify real fraud, it has to be hard proof, not suspicion that, if combined with a narrative, implies fraud. That whole, “innocent until PROVEN guilty” thing gets in the way, and I have a hard time believing Trump’s observers were so incompetent as to miss getting exactly the sort of evidence of them being removed that they were there to collect in the first place.
I don’t want to get too into the weeds here, but that’s the sort of problem I’m talking about. I can’t endorse changing Presidents based on suspicions and “what if’s.”
Honestly, I am looking forward to this audit thing being released so we can actually examine the hard evidence of fraud that you guys believe must exist. Because if I’m wrong, then the audit should figure out how to prove it.
I appreciate that.
I can tell you I’m not here for disinformation. I tend to avoid debating here unless someone specifically asks for a non-Q challenge to their position or in a situation where I feel my own expertise or research can help clarify some question.
I’m pretty open about not being a Q supporter, but I have a tendency to hang out almost exclusively with people I disagree with.
People who agree with me have nothing to teach me. My desire to get smarter means I need to make myself vulnerable to being proven wrong, and people who agree with me aren’t going to accomplish that. It’s extraordinarily boring limiting myself to only those who see things like I do.
And like I’ve said before, one of us is extraordinarily wrong about Q. Neither of us is going to prove who that is until either the Plan comes to fruition, or we talk to one another. And like I said, I love talking to people who disagree with me.
Republican observers weren’t there to specifically find and collect evidence on behalf of Trump. Most of them are just volunteers for their state’s GOP. I know this, because I am one and I know many others. The ones that witnessed what they believe to be fraudulent activity made statements & signed affidavits, some took photos, and some were brave enough to testify in the senate hearings last fall.
If there’s nothing to hide, why are democrats doing everything in their power to stop real audits (not recounts) from happening?
If the voting machines are so secure, why did Kamala Harris make a statement on the senate floor in 2018 talking about how easy it is to hack them?
If you honestly believe nothing shady happened and this was the most secure election of all time, there is nothing I can tell you to open your mind to another possibility.
Yeah, I appreciate the conversation and would be happy to go into this in detail in its own thread if you like, but I was more just trying to answer the original question in good faith and used that as an example of “proof” that requires faith in a narrative in order to accept.
Trust me, I am open to the possibility of fraud and shadiness. I probably spent more words in 2015-16 against Hillary Clinton than anyone on this board, and I am certainly no fan of Biden. But certified election results don’t get overturned because of shadiness, and so we’re both hoping that this audit can actually provide some sort of falsifiable proof for us to examine, because debating shady maybe’s doesn’t get us anywhere.