The purpose of the psy op is yet to be determined. The two possible purposes are complacency or awareness. Nobody ever said Q is not / was not a psy op. I know a lot of things I never knew before Q. Q has completely shifted my world view. So yeah, Q is a psy op.
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (27)
sorted by:
The purpose is to deprogram centuries of subliminal and liminal conditioning using the revelation of the complete and total subjection of the human race the same way Pavlov conditioned dogs by using the exposure of the 2020 election rigging that will lead to the revelation that we lost control in 1840.
Why 1840?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6omJdg4_unY
That is, of course, not the ultimate goal.
Just the first step.
Never look a gift horse in the mouth, but if a horse speaks you should at least try to figure out what it is saying.
https://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/dont-look-a-gift-horse-in-the-mouth.html
cc: u/MAGAdeburger u/v8power
As a historian, I've always considered 1840 an interesting year. "Tippecanoe and Tyler Too." William Henry Harrison, the last president born as a British subject in the Thirteen Colonies. Quite an impressive public service record both as a statesman and and military man. Very popular. Only real drawback was his proslavery sentiments... tried but failed to get the Northwest Ordinance's ban on the expansion of slavery into new US territory repealed. Enter, John Tyler, a shit of a politician and not much better of a human being. His Ascendency stole the presidency after Harrison's oddly timed death from "illness" only 31 days after being inaugurated. Tyler should have never been President. Technically, under the Constitution, he never was President. As VP he was to act as president until a new president was elected. That was the text of Article II Section 1. It didn't say "the VP BECOMES president for the remainder of the term." A new election should have taken place, with Tyler acting as president until a new president chosen by the Electors. Some challenged his move, yet nobody pushed enough to prevent it. Problem was that Constitution was somewhat ambiguous as to what exactly was to happen. Tyler took advantage of it. Tyler was Calhounian promoter of the concept of state sovereignty in objection to the Constitution's system of duel sovereignty. Wanted president to have more power than Congress. Pushed for Texas to be added "manifest destiny", in large part, to expand slavery and the Virginian/southern aristocratic plantation system. Supported Polk. Got Texas. Got the Mexican War. Spread of slavery. All dominos towards the Rebellion of 1860, of which Tyler aligned with the traitors. Dare I say that Tippicannoe's death was quite good timing for the rise of the pro-slavery forces... coincidence? 🤔
Bankers.
True, or just antisemitic? 🤔
https://rense.com/general81/d3ss.htm
Of personal note, I was at the Touro Synagogue several years ago for a conference on religious liberty in American History. Involvement in the slave trade never once crossed my mind... but then again I also am reminded of the shit of a human being called Judah P. Benjamin, so perhaps there's some meat to the story presented in this link
1840 is when the Whigs (a minority party) "joined" with the Democrats (bought the brand name Democrat) and together they became the majority party in the Senate. Remember this is when Senators were appointed by the Governors. Do the math.
The money behind the "union" of the parties was August Belmont, Rothschild financial representative for the United States.
Check out who August Belmont was married to...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/August_Belmont
Remember a while back I wrote about Adelicia and her cotton.
Follow the money all the way back to the Louisiana Purchase.
Not gonna be Jefferson's finest hour when we learn the details of the true history of the purchase.
I also spent a lot of time researching the Marshall Plan.
I got physically sick.
Gen K [JFK]
https://qagg.news/?q=%23%231433
u/v8power
Cui bono?
Louisiana Purchase...
Just sayin.
"Jay's treaty, as first drawn, consented that no cotton should be exported from America. It changed the very history of the country when, in 1793, Eli Whitney invented the saw-gin, by which a slave could clean 1,000 pounds of cotton per day. Slavery at once ceased to be a passive, innocuous institution, promising soon to die out, and became a means of gain, to be upheld and extended in all possible ways."
Who introduced slavery into the colonies, where did they get them, from whom did they buy them.?
The answer to the first is not "The British."
Cui bono?