After Capitol riot, 15,000 National Guard members could be deployed in D.C. during inauguration.
So by applying mirrors and deltas to this Q post, finding a date, and then searching for notable Qincidences on that date, I was able to find a story about the National Guard?
By decoding a post talking about the National Guard?
How many coincidences until mathematically impossible?
Who controls the NG?
Well, what other clues can we get?
Biggest drop to ever be provided on Pol."
Interesting. Pol.
I know you're making a surface-level normie assumption about what that means. But Q wasn't talking to you. He was talking to autists.
And high IQ autists know that Q must be military intelligence.
Pol must be a military term.
Pol: Petroleum, Oil, and Lubricants. This is a military term used to associate to these supplies as a discrete unit. Pol.
This post doesn't say we're going to see a drop on the Pol board. That's the obvious trap to confuse the Cabal.
We're going to see a drop ABOUT the petroleum, oil, and lubricant industry, and the way that they've been controlling the highest levels of the National Guard.
You see, it's been happening since the original oil spills, when the guard was deployed out there to help clean up the mess of these companies.
Maybe because the National Guard was bought by Big Oil?
So therefore, I have just found a new Q proof. By doing heavy research and learning from Q's decoding lessons, I've determine this post means that the National Guard is compromised by what they've coded as Pol: Big Oil. These companies can now deploy the National Guard at will (Who controls the NG?), and Q gave us a VERY clear hint that the National Guard deployed to the inauguration were compromised agents of Big Oil.
Obviously.
I know it's hard to accept how I got there, but it's not the only one. How many of these do I need to show you before it's mathematically impossible that I'm right?
You didn't dig deep enough, "boy." Think Mirror.
You really think a military operation designed to code things from a Cabal that's controlled the world for thousands of years would use a code of "use the actual date and just kind Google what was going on"? He would need hardcore researchers for that? You think that's all it takes to really understand how to read Q properly?
Or do you think this entire strategy I just used is perhaps a questionable way of reaching my conclusion?
Dismiss the source, even if I can't source it. Never attack the argument.
-A lesson from Zeitreise.
Thank you for offering me an opportunity to dissect one of these Q posts in public. I don't like to do that unless asked, as I'm not really here to change minds. But since you twisted my arm as hard as you did, I am happy to oblige.
But be careful. There have been a few people around here who have take pride in the role of becoming my dedicated arch-nemesis, and usually it's met with suspicion (eventually) from everyone else that you're working with me as a straw-man foil.
I'm not here to change minds. I'm here to understand how you think through questions and critique. That's how Socrates did it, and that's how I try do it. Your insistence on making this a battle between us is motivated only on one side.
The problem is that, to a normie, there is absolutely no difference between what I just did and the logic that you're using to justify your belief that Britney Spears is sending coded messages about the CIA via social media.
And, of course, the notion that Donald Trump of all people is fighting in a secret war against a cabal of pedophiles, let alone on the right side of that war.
If you think your decoding strategy is better than mine, then you'd better be prepared to explain that to the normies eventually, because right now, that's how Q is explained in every video, in every proof, in almost every thread here.
Which is what I'm trying to help fix.
Some of the leaps you ask us to do look JUST like that. Some of the things you ask me to dismiss or accept look JUST like that.
And until your arguments stop looking JUST like that, normies are going to respond to you exactly the way I expect you'd respond to what I just did up there.
Haven’t lied about a thing. I’ve been with Q from the beginning-ish (he blended in to a lot of similar accounts on 4chan and didn’t really stand out until 8chan, which most people on 4chan avoided going to without reason given the risk of the material they hosted).
Whether you were there from the beginning is a matter of conjecture. You have demonstrated more passion for believing in the world Q described than technique in applying the principles Q described.
You don’t believe in a reality where someone could have been there, participating, reading stuff, and not believing. You have no reason to believe this except for pride and myopia.
You don’t believe it’s possible to be intelligent, honest, and to have a different perspective from you.
You can still change that about yourself, you know. It costs you nothing.
Bullshit. You have no way to prove that and no way to know that.
Dig Deeper.
Listen to Q. Think Mirror.
11/01 becomes 01/11.
January 11.
But not 2017. This is post #22.
2 + 2
This post requires a four year delta to interpret. You see?
So, what happened Jan 11, 2021?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2021/01/11/national-guard-protests-riots-capital/
Wait, WHAT?
So by applying mirrors and deltas to this Q post, finding a date, and then searching for notable Qincidences on that date, I was able to find a story about the National Guard?
By decoding a post talking about the National Guard?
How many coincidences until mathematically impossible?
Well, what other clues can we get?
Interesting. Pol.
I know you're making a surface-level normie assumption about what that means. But Q wasn't talking to you. He was talking to autists.
And high IQ autists know that Q must be military intelligence.
Pol must be a military term.
Pol: Petroleum, Oil, and Lubricants. This is a military term used to associate to these supplies as a discrete unit. Pol.
https://www.wbdg.org/ffc/dod/cpc-source/petroleum-oil-lubricants-storage-distribution-systems-knowledge-area
It's coming together now.
This post doesn't say we're going to see a drop on the Pol board. That's the obvious trap to confuse the Cabal.
We're going to see a drop ABOUT the petroleum, oil, and lubricant industry, and the way that they've been controlling the highest levels of the National Guard.
You see, it's been happening since the original oil spills, when the guard was deployed out there to help clean up the mess of these companies.
https://www.nationalguard.mil/News/Article/577099/gates-approves-federal-money-for-guard-units-in-gulf/
That was in 2010.
Weird how right before that, we see an increase in NG deployments, isn't it?
https://www.nationalguard.mil/News/Article/574062/alabama-guard-deployments-increase-this-year/
Maybe because the National Guard was bought by Big Oil?
So therefore, I have just found a new Q proof. By doing heavy research and learning from Q's decoding lessons, I've determine this post means that the National Guard is compromised by what they've coded as Pol: Big Oil. These companies can now deploy the National Guard at will (Who controls the NG?), and Q gave us a VERY clear hint that the National Guard deployed to the inauguration were compromised agents of Big Oil.
Obviously.
I know it's hard to accept how I got there, but it's not the only one. How many of these do I need to show you before it's mathematically impossible that I'm right?
You didn't dig deep enough, "boy." Think Mirror.
You really think a military operation designed to code things from a Cabal that's controlled the world for thousands of years would use a code of "use the actual date and just kind Google what was going on"? He would need hardcore researchers for that? You think that's all it takes to really understand how to read Q properly?
Or do you think this entire strategy I just used is perhaps a questionable way of reaching my conclusion?
Dismiss the source, even if I can't source it. Never attack the argument. -A lesson from Zeitreise.
Thank you for offering me an opportunity to dissect one of these Q posts in public. I don't like to do that unless asked, as I'm not really here to change minds. But since you twisted my arm as hard as you did, I am happy to oblige.
But be careful. There have been a few people around here who have take pride in the role of becoming my dedicated arch-nemesis, and usually it's met with suspicion (eventually) from everyone else that you're working with me as a straw-man foil.
I'm not here to change minds. I'm here to understand how you think through questions and critique. That's how Socrates did it, and that's how I try do it. Your insistence on making this a battle between us is motivated only on one side.
The problem is that, to a normie, there is absolutely no difference between what I just did and the logic that you're using to justify your belief that Britney Spears is sending coded messages about the CIA via social media.
https://greatawakening.win/p/142AwNW4Yu/x/c/4OUhcXXKUxc
And, of course, the notion that Donald Trump of all people is fighting in a secret war against a cabal of pedophiles, let alone on the right side of that war.
If you think your decoding strategy is better than mine, then you'd better be prepared to explain that to the normies eventually, because right now, that's how Q is explained in every video, in every proof, in almost every thread here.
Which is what I'm trying to help fix.
Some of the leaps you ask us to do look JUST like that. Some of the things you ask me to dismiss or accept look JUST like that.
And until your arguments stop looking JUST like that, normies are going to respond to you exactly the way I expect you'd respond to what I just did up there.
I don’t use terminology from the old days that people here aren’t likely to know it just to swing my dick around about being an OG.
The point is to communicate, not masturbate.
Haven’t lied about a thing. I’ve been with Q from the beginning-ish (he blended in to a lot of similar accounts on 4chan and didn’t really stand out until 8chan, which most people on 4chan avoided going to without reason given the risk of the material they hosted).
Whether you were there from the beginning is a matter of conjecture. You have demonstrated more passion for believing in the world Q described than technique in applying the principles Q described.
You don’t believe in a reality where someone could have been there, participating, reading stuff, and not believing. You have no reason to believe this except for pride and myopia.
You don’t believe it’s possible to be intelligent, honest, and to have a different perspective from you.
You can still change that about yourself, you know. It costs you nothing.