However, as of today, some pedes and anons are suggesting (or asserting) that Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973) being overturned is "the marker" Q was/is referring to.
u/riceka is stating that 11.3 is not the same as 113 (implying that the interpretation that RvW 410 U.S. 113 is not the 11.3 marker Q is talking about).
11.3 is 113. The numbers line up. It's exactly a Q thing to do. Patriots are in control. Nothing, not even the whole host of Moloch, can stop what is coming.
So what if they want to jump at any gun, it's called faith or maybe hope. I see nothing wrong with either interpretation. It could be 11.3 war manual, R v W 113, both, neither or multiple more meanings too. The whole point is to throw ideas around and believe what you think is most likely. None of us will agree 100%. That's the beauty of freedom.
That is clear. It seems to come down to whether 11.3 should be interpreted as 113. If it is the case then the law of war manual and all the theories based on it would be incorrect and potentially a red herring. People could argue "double meanings", but you can't have double meanings for an event triggered marker.
Personal opinion. We have some brilliant anons and interpreters. But I think that the larger number of anons do not really practice balanced due diligence, and don't keep their convictions in reserve, but invest too readily in this or that theory.
Case in point: who really knew that the Election would be stolen and we'd have sleepy Joe Chaos for 1.5 years+? No anons knew or forecasted that, as far as I know. Certainly not me. I was taken by massive surprise, like everyone else.
Yet, here we are in 2022 June, and so much of it makes sense.
The Law of War manual theories, specifically those raised by MajicEyesonly, are intriguing and certainly seem to have some relevance. But, its a theory and interpretation. Like Devolution, and like so many other things.
On the surface of things, in the Q drops, 11.3 seems to directly refer to Nov 3, that stolen election. It certainly is a massive marker.
But the point is, we can theorize as much as we want. But it's just as important to acknowledge and recognize when the theory you believe has limitations, and to acknowledge and recognize that with many, many things, one simply doesn't know.
One of my favorite Q commentators/reporters is Dave Hayes for this reason. he admits it when something is ambiguous, or there is not sufficient evidence or data, etc. And he distinguishes between the facts and his beliefs (convictions).
Some people cannot do that simply because they are overly investing in their chosen belief about Q. That's really anathema to the Q message, in my opinion. It's kind of the opposite of what Q wants us to do.
You don't need to understand everything to know that Q is legit. Being able to acknowledge and recognize doubts, unknowns etc is a sign of true confidence and true faith, not the opposite. But some folks find that too hard to do, it seems.
Elaborate.
Ok.
In different posts, starting with Drop 22, Q indicates 11.3 as "the marker"
See posts, 15, 25, 34, etc.
https://qanon.pub/?q=11.3
However, as of today, some pedes and anons are suggesting (or asserting) that Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973) being overturned is "the marker" Q was/is referring to.
u/riceka is stating that 11.3 is not the same as 113 (implying that the interpretation that RvW 410 U.S. 113 is not the 11.3 marker Q is talking about).
Edit: That's what the OP is asserting (not me).
11.3 is 113. The numbers line up. It's exactly a Q thing to do. Patriots are in control. Nothing, not even the whole host of Moloch, can stop what is coming.
Sigh. OK. Sure. Argue it with the OP, not with me.
Having said that, look at ALL the posts that reference 11.3. All of the latter ones directly reference the stolen election, which happened on 11.3.
Are there multiple meanings? often.
But knowing that Q is legit doesn't mean one should start running with one's biases. Q told us to do the opposite, in fact.
It MIGHT be what Q was talking about, or it might not be. I'll wait for more data.
I'm NOT asserting the interpretation is wrong. But some pedes seem so ready to jump at any gun.... <kek>
And who said anyone could stop what is coming? Jeepers.
Due diligence, please.
So what if they want to jump at any gun, it's called faith or maybe hope. I see nothing wrong with either interpretation. It could be 11.3 war manual, R v W 113, both, neither or multiple more meanings too. The whole point is to throw ideas around and believe what you think is most likely. None of us will agree 100%. That's the beauty of freedom.
That is clear. It seems to come down to whether 11.3 should be interpreted as 113. If it is the case then the law of war manual and all the theories based on it would be incorrect and potentially a red herring. People could argue "double meanings", but you can't have double meanings for an event triggered marker.
Personal opinion. We have some brilliant anons and interpreters. But I think that the larger number of anons do not really practice balanced due diligence, and don't keep their convictions in reserve, but invest too readily in this or that theory.
Case in point: who really knew that the Election would be stolen and we'd have sleepy Joe Chaos for 1.5 years+? No anons knew or forecasted that, as far as I know. Certainly not me. I was taken by massive surprise, like everyone else.
Yet, here we are in 2022 June, and so much of it makes sense.
The Law of War manual theories, specifically those raised by MajicEyesonly, are intriguing and certainly seem to have some relevance. But, its a theory and interpretation. Like Devolution, and like so many other things.
On the surface of things, in the Q drops, 11.3 seems to directly refer to Nov 3, that stolen election. It certainly is a massive marker.
But the point is, we can theorize as much as we want. But it's just as important to acknowledge and recognize when the theory you believe has limitations, and to acknowledge and recognize that with many, many things, one simply doesn't know.
One of my favorite Q commentators/reporters is Dave Hayes for this reason. he admits it when something is ambiguous, or there is not sufficient evidence or data, etc. And he distinguishes between the facts and his beliefs (convictions).
Some people cannot do that simply because they are overly investing in their chosen belief about Q. That's really anathema to the Q message, in my opinion. It's kind of the opposite of what Q wants us to do.
You don't need to understand everything to know that Q is legit. Being able to acknowledge and recognize doubts, unknowns etc is a sign of true confidence and true faith, not the opposite. But some folks find that too hard to do, it seems.
This makes literal zero sense. Sorry.
Wait... Are you saying that the OPs assertion makes no sense?
I'm not saying either way, really. I'm just trying to fill in the missing pieces for Atlas so that he/she can interpret OP's post.
No need to be sorry. I'm not commenting on the OP, per se.