If youve been reading Q since Oct 2017, you know what I mean
Edit to clarify--what I mean is there is a Q way of speaking and this lacks it.
Ok eg this stood out immediately: Use your logic
Tell me why this is not Q like
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (253)
sorted by:
I think you could be right about the time zone situation, or at least convincing enough that I will defer to you on it for now. Interesting catch.
Which leaves us where I said, that the evidence you have is that Q suggested McCain would be “in the news” when he was in the news every single day. And that vague prediction was one month, apparently to the minute, before McCain’s death, which you consider to be highly suspicious.
Your suggestion is that the most reasonable explanation for this connection is that Q is responsible for, or at least knowledgeable about, McCain’s secret execution, in lieu of his death being from his publicly known brain cancer and being 81 years old.
That seems like an incredible extrapolation to me. I understand (though disagree) that you believe there is a great weight of evidence in deltas that supports this, but your explanation for Q’s involvement still leaves me scratching my head.
Why did McCain get a deal? Didn’t Q usually capitalize “NO DEALS”? The Great Awakening is happening by trying and executing people for their crimes in secret?
Instead of revealing it?
I’m trying to reconcile a world in which Q is trying to “awaken” people to the truth about how evil people like McCain and Clinton apparently are, but then carrying out the justice secretly, DELIBERATELY covering up the real cause of death, and ensuring the only people who believe the truth sound like crazy people to the outside world by matching up deltas.
Everything about that strategy screams that Q is someone trying to protect the legacy of the Cabal that he’s executing and ensuring that the truth, if it ever leaks out, is attributed to the wild conspiracy theories of that QAnon guy.
I don’t even believe the notion of Q being a “black hat” (since I haven’t even been convinced of the Cabal that Q and Trump blame for their problems), but that narrative seems like a Bad Guy narrative to me.
There's no way Q could operate with plausible deniability while allowing a public execution of a traitor and announcing the reasons for his execution. It appears to be that the plan requires people's reputations to remain intact.
McCain likely cooperated because the plan served his interest of staying alive a bit longer, long enough to play a villain in the movie that's unfolding. He got to have his day being the one that blocked the elimination of Obamacare with half the country cheering him.
I use the term cooperation lightly. I don't know that McCain actually cooperated beyond not running to a microphone and screaming that military intelligence is going to execute him. I can't imagine he'd get anything beneficial from doing such a thing.
My interpretation of what Q means when he says "NO DEALS" doesn't include adjustments to someone's sentence based on cooperation. To me it means someone won't go free in exchange for their testimony.
At the end of the day he was still executed.
You can believe Q is real and who they say they are without agreeing that their method is the best.
I don't like the fact that justice is being delayed. I'd prefer that all the bad guys were rounded up on day one and executed.
But I don't have all the facts. I don't know what a cabal with trillions of dollars at its disposal is capable of. I don't know what pitfalls and deadman's switches exist that need diffusing.
If I were the cabal, at full strength on day one, and knew the end was inevitable, what prevents me from poisoning all water supplies? Exploding dirty bombs in major cities? Taking out the entire power grid? Exploding an EMP and frying every circuit in the USA?
The only reason the cabal is not pissing in the bathtub is because they believe they are winning, and they believe they'll be the owner of the bathtub at the end of the day so they should preserve it.
I would prefer swift justice, but I don't know the ramifications of what would happen if Trump steamrolled the cabal on day-one and if the outcome for the citizens of the US would be far worse.
What is the purpose of Q?
A day is coming when the president of the US will be arrested. When most of the congress will be arrested. When some members of SCOTUS will be arrested.
When that day happens, it will already start off as having the appearance of a coup. An entirely-cabal-owned MSM is starting the day off with it almost exactly looking like a coup. It won't be difficult at all for them to paint it as such, when that day happens.
On that day, what prevents the stock market from collapsing? From actual patriots picking up their guns and assembling to prevent the collapse of government?
When that day comes, there's ALOT of explaining to do to keep peace and stability.
That is the purpose of Q. To give the population a head-start on understanding the eventual arrests.
Peace and stability when that day happens are the only purpose of Q.
Sound crazy now. Sound like the only sane ones on the day(s) of arrests. On that day, no one will care or need to know what a delta is. The purpose of the deltas is so that anons could have faith they're receiving intel from actual military intelligence before the day(s) of mass arrests.
Take the average individual who heard someone speak about Q, but thinks they're crazy. Even they will understand what is happening on the day of arrests. They won't be speculating that it's a coup, instead they'll say to themselves "Oh, I guess that crazy relative was actually right".
After the arrests, people won't need have faith in deltas from a military intelligence backchannel. They'll get their explanations from the hundreds of thousands of anons who are already aware of what is happening.
I see it as taking out the cabal's infrastructure and allowing it to collapse like a house of cards while giving the superficial appearance that everything is fine (from the perspective of the upper hierarchy of the cabal), so they don't piss in the bathtub.
Oh, come now. Everyone's heard of Epstein's island. Work out what the existence of Epstein's island means. Extrapolate the implications.
Why would Hunter's laptop keep such a large volume of kompromat? If you were doing illegal things with children, would you take pictures of it and then bring it in to a laptop repair place and forget about it?
You don't think a single dollar has been stolen from the American people based on a politician being blackmailed?
You know the cabal exists, you just either think it's such a small problem that it's no big deal or haven't put 1+1 together to understand the full ramifications of what it means when laws are written by blackmailed congressmen, enforced by a blackmailed presidency and ruled to be just by a blackmailed SCOTUS.
So this sort of demands a question, then.
What if the Plan successfully eliminates the Deep State’s influence and power, but never publicly vindicates you?
What if the Plan requires that Biden serve out his term uneventfully, Trump not to return to office, no public arrests or executions, and that Democrats might actually get elected, even to the Presidency?
But no more Satanists or child sacrificing. Nobody will ever know you were right, and you’ll never be able to prove it.
Is that a Plan that works for you?
So, to be clear, literally every believer of Q is smarter than every Deep State operative by a high margin, correct?
The NSA has some of the most naturally-talented codebreakers who ever lived. The CIA has access to intelligence resources far beyond what anyone here can access from their laptop.
And none of these people can see the alleged inevitability of Q’s victory? None of them are smart enough to decode what you have?
I think that would be a profoundly arrogant assumption for anyone to make, and completely unworthy of the strategic brilliance Q is supposed to be representing. Always assume ANY messages you publicly send to your own people can be decoded, in context, by anyone else listening.
If the Plan relies on the Deep State being too stupid to do what the people on this site can do, I think that’s an uncomfortable level of naïveté, and definitely not the work of an experienced military operator.
“No (P)lan survives first contact with the enemy.”
For falsifiability, how do you plan to test whether or not this belief is incorrect?
Is there a specific date that the Plan MUST have happened by in order to make sense? If we reach the 2024 election, and Trump is just running again, and no mass arrests or Awakening is occurring in any obvious way, does that mean that the Plan hasn’t happened?
I just worry if the belief is “some day, this will happen,” then you have no way to know whether you’ve been fooled. You could wait for decades, and assume Q was just operating on a forty-year delta.
Every theory should have a way to prove it’s wrong. What would prove your belief in this reckoning by Q to be incorrect? Is it possible?
Good! That means it’ll be loud, obvious, and falsifiable. And if that day comes, I have promised to be here and take my licks for it. It’ll be super easy for me to see I was proven wrong.
But if that day doesn’t come, it’s not going to be a big, loud event. It just won’t happen. The world will continue moving on without Q.
And again, if the day doesn’t come, how will you know? What’s the signal that the Plan isn’t occurring or isn’t real? It won’t be super easy for you to see if you’ve been proven wrong, certainly not as easy as it would be to prove me wrong.
Contrary to the accusations that are often thrown my way on this site, my view of how the world works is not more simplistic than Q’s perspective. In fact, I’d wager it’s more complicated, by far.
I don’t believe in one Cabal. I believe in thousands, tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of criminal organizations, many of which have nothing to do with each other, and some of them that traffic children.
Epstein was one. Just one. Of thousands.
And when Epstein was taken down, someone else probably took his place within the month. Someone who may not have even known Epstein, but who has some new source of trafficked children.
I don’t see crime a solvable problem. There will always be a demand for things people aren't supposed to have. want things they aren’t supposed to have. Drugs, illegal weapons, illegal sex, whatever. This is never going to change as long as people are capable of sin.
Q is not going to save people from sin. Q is not God. You can’t win a battle against evil as long as a single human is still alive. You can only refuse to lose until the end of humanity.
The glory isn’t in beating evil. It’s in fighting it anyway, even knowing you can’t even stamp it out completely.
I believe in bad people, and I believe that bad people sometimes work together to do bad things, and I absolutely believe that rich people and politicians have an easier time than most doing bad things without getting caught. I believe these people should not be allowed to do bad things unopposed.
We agree on these facts.
What I don’t yet believe is that there is a single unified Illuminati-like Cabal. I don’t yet believe that Satanism has anything to do with literally any of this. I simply don’t see the good guys and the bad guys being divided into two discrete sides.
Most importantly, I don’t think Donald Trump has any role in any such conflict. At all. I think he believes the election was stolen from him, but I don’t believe he has any Plan to rectify it, nor does he have anyone around him who can help, even if they agree.
And I absolutely don’t believe in any Plan that claims to achieve such a massive victory against a unified army of evil, but secretly, and with some degree of permanency that makes the “sacrifice” Trump made by leaving the White House worth it.
I think Trump is probably just watching the news like everyone else these days.
I have looked for Trump to talk about this Deep State in a context that doesn’t benefit him or shift blame away from him. I have looked for Trump to accuse a supporter of being Cabal. I have been looking for some reason to counter the argument that the DS is just a scapegoat for Trump, so that he doesn’t have to tell his supporters he fucked up or couldn’t make the deal or, in other words, lost a battle publicly.
I am open to being convinced, but if you’re correct, I won’t need to be convinced. I just need to wait until the day that the arrests start.
I have no reason not to wait for the next twenty years. What about you?
I really do appreciate the time you’re putting into this conversation. Even though I know my questioning style can seem combative, I am learning quite a bit about your perspective, which I am hoping is what we both want.
One more point as it just occurred to me.
Countries of the entire world, in the span of less than a month, adopted the exact same mask mandates. Countries that didn't, like Iceland or African countries, are the extreme exception to the rule.
How does something like that happen so spontaneously unless it were the same people organizing the response?
Heavy-handed vaccine requirements, equally enforced worldwide for the first time in history.
Heavy-handed censorship has been applied worldwide, equally and coordinated.
All mainstream news, worldwide, pushing for censorship, pushing for vaccines and mask use, entirely coordinated.
The destruction of the food supply is equal and worldwide. As many of our food factories burn to the ground, Netherlands is protesting over them shutting down half their farms. Ukraine used to be the "breadbasket of Europe".
A little bit ago, they killed 36 million chickens in the US over accusation of some new bird flu. In Sri Lanka, they banned the use of fertilizer to grow food.
There are three coordinated situations ...
I could go on, for instance worldwide unified news coverage. It's eerie how, regardless of the country involved, the local mainstream news coverage doesn't question things like mask mandates or vaccinations and always acts as apologists against anyone who would question otherwise.
The extreme coordination of it all is evidence against it being "uncoordinated by 10s of thousands of unrelated criminals".
My being vindicated isn't my purpose, or even an imagined side benefit, beyond having the desired end result.
I think it's a completely unsubstantiated assertion that patriots who follow Q need to be validated or "proven right" for their ego's sake. That's not the motivation whatsoever.
Who would ever assume that an online community that has been the most ostracized in modern history is, deep down, really only in it for social validation?
And it's mostly an online situation. It seems that you imagine I need validation from my friends, family or even casual acquaintances but honestly I have yet to meet someone who actually hates Trump or likes Biden.
I don't think your premise is accurate. It's more about curiosity and having the spare time to research and wanting to do so.
An analogy would be some guy who fixes up antique cars in their spare time, because they have the time to do so, are interested and enjoy doing it. Is everyone else who doesn't want to fix antique cars stupid?
It would depend on how they were exposed to Q, from what source and how much trust they have in that source, coupled with how much it interests them to know and how much time they want to dedicate to finding out.
To many, their only knowledge of Q is the maga shaman from the supposed January 6 insurrection, told to them by news they trust.
Why would they be motivated to even spend a second learning more?
But as for the people you suggest have read all the Q drops but still disagree (yet why would they read them all if they disagreed?) ... those people will still know what's going on when arrests happen.
The money in sex trafficking doesn't come from the fee the client will pay for a trafficked individual.
The money comes with investing millions into getting the politician elected, whom you have a large volume of kompromat on, into office so they can vote yes to send a country multi-billions of dollars in foreign aid, knowing most if not all will be pocketed with no accountability.
Test your theory against my theory. Under your theory, Hunter Biden would never keep a single image of himself having sex with minors on his laptop, knowing its a risk and there being no real reason to incriminate himself. Your theory doesn't make sense in that situation.
Under my theory, Hunter kept all the images because it was a prerequisite for working with China. They demanded kompromat in order to ensure he would perform, else the images be released. They were intended to prevent him from changing his mind as he sold his country out.
For starters, let's not act like the premise of Q doesn't have an inherent built-in expiration date. The falsifiability is if arrests never happen.
"Never happen by what date?" will come as hundreds of thousands of different answers coming from each individual who is following Q and is something you won't have much influence over.
It's a moot question to me, because I've already allotted for the possibility that Q isn't real and that factor is already baked in the cake.
There's no imperative to be convinced. If arrests happen you'll understand and Q will have served its purpose, if they don't then belief in Q will diminish and you will have received your conditions for Q being falsifiable.
Respectfully, are you sure you want to commit to that assertion so completely?
Every day or so, I see posts from non-handshake accounts expressing a desire for public arrests. Why public? If private can accomplish the mission, and it already seems to be the way Q is going with McCain and possibly others, then what is the point of streaming the proof on television?
You haven't seen these comments asking for some sort of vindication? Perhaps you don't need it, but do you feel that comfortable suggesting that members of the Q movement have "no motivation whatsoever" to enjoy the schadenfreude of the "I told you so" moment of the Storm and the sudden confirmed, public elevation to expert on current events?
If they know that some assassin intends to kill them and permanently destroy their legacy unless they get that car fixed?
Yeah, I'd say that's pretty stupid. :)
I have plenty of interest in figuring this stuff out, and I am under no threat whatsoever from Q's success. If Q is actually releasing information that is confirmed as proving knowledge of the Cabal's plans, the Cabal would know that better than anyone, since they're the ones making the plans.
They'd be the ones freaking out over deltas, because unlike me, they can actually confirm their own involvement in the events those deltas are targeting.
So yes, I would very much say that if there is any legitimacy to Q whatsoever, this Cabal would know it better than any of you. And they'd be more interested than any of you in getting to the bottom of it. And they'd have far more resources to do so than anyone around here, unless one of our users has a very interesting secret. :)
I would respectfully suggest that if you are constantly dismissing the capacity for people to act illogically, then I am not surprised that Q is the only way to make sense of the world.
People are dumb. Criminals get caught leaving behind evidence all the time, especially sexual predators who need to keep trophies for their memories.
I don't know if Biden is guilty of the accusations that Q people make around here, but if you're going to assume that criminality corresponds with carefulness or intelligence, then I would definitely take a step back and reevaluate. The vast majority of criminals are caught because they did something stupid to incriminate themselves.
Eh, kind of.
But it's up to each and every individual to decide when arrests haven't happened, isn't it? That's kind of the issue.
The Q movement as a whole is non-falsifiable, because there is no way to prove that arrests haven't happened or will never happen. There's always a chance that disinformation was necessary, and that it's just a longer delta than we thought.
Which means the falsifiable condition is, "when enough individuals get sick of waiting and hit some personal, gut-related arbitrary deadline." Which isn't really falsifiable, as far as the entire philosophy goes.
That's why I've always been interested in this question. If I'm wrong, it's loud, obvious, and undeniable.
If you are, nobody is ever going to prove it. This movement just decays one person at a time, and nobody ever really has to recognize it.
I struggle to differentiate that mechanic with the death of a religion. The condition is only falsifiable on one direction. In the other direction, we're just waiting for believers to lose faith on their own accord. They weren't proven wrong. They just give up.
Most researchable fields are falsifiable through the presentation of evidence countering it, not through the researchers eventually getting bored of waiting for someone else to prove them right.
As a note, I'll state openly that I'm not a child and won't consider retiring this conversation as a "forfeit" by either side. If you think we've milked this conversation as far as we can, then I'm happy to touch base with you the next time we both find a topic interesting to talk about. I don't like accidentally trapping people in discussions.
But I'm always happy to keep talking as long as you think we have something to talk about.