Nine hours ago, Elon Musk created a poll on Twitter. The poll says, ambiguously, Reinstate former President Trump Interesting choice of words? Subtle meanings? Let's apply some anonysense here.
Timeline - A Very Rough Overview of Some Data Points Worth Considering
February 2022
Truth Social boots up. q > Q account is revealed, Kash Patel shows he's hanging out with Q. "Oh, we're just having fun and you know, trolling the lamestream media".
April 2022
Musk bids for Twitter. Ruckus is created. Did such a ruckus draw MORE attention to Musks acquisition of Twitter, and twitter itself, or less?
May 2022
Folks on DJT's team start doing interviews with anon commentators, like X22, InTheMatrix, etc. Big hat tips to the anon / Q community. Increasing validation of Q.
June - October 2022
Twitter Ruckus increases. Battle. "Not gonna buy!" "No, you're gonna buy!" > Right before the Midterms: "Ok, I'll buy! You're fired!!!"
Musk acquires Twitter, begins kickings butts, doing a massive clearing.
DJT Team continues 'courting' anons and anon commentators. DJT starts using wwg1wga theme song at his rallies. Begins retruthing Q-related content more and more on TS.
Recognition of Q gradually increases.
November 2022
Just prior to Midterms, DJT announces the announcement. Nov 15.
November 8, Midterms take place. DS - MAGA war intensifies. Lots of dooming.
Nov 15 (speculation) DS drops false flag to divert away from DJT "announcement", DJT only announces 2024 run, DS backpedals false flag.
Following Midterms
Musk starts ramping up Twitter clearance, triggers massive layoffs and resignations from staff.
Just before or after Nov 15 (cannot verify as no access to TS, and qagg isn't helping), DJT re-truths recent Q drop "End the Endless"
Corrupt DOJ announces special counsel in to 'criminal activities' allegedly related to DJT. DJT declares he will NOT cooperate.
Seems like things are really heating up.
November 18, Musk posts poll "Reinstate former President Trump"
Are We On Track? How Can We Know?
If you consider even the very sparse collection of data points above, it should be obvious that something is going on, and that things are habbening.
For me, however, I consider our recent (and possibly ongoing) wave of doomerism is another signal that things are heating up.
I wrote about my own personal experience of this here
All the doomering we just went through - in my view, this is a VERY clear sign that the spiritual war is intensifying, and that we have just passed through a significant, major milestone. That doomering isn't merely psychological. It's also spiritual. Anyone who has experienced spiritual attack knows that a toxic mix of despair, fear, anxiety laced with lies or visions of doom are a staple weapon of the satanic realms. Purpose? To demoralize, to destroy.
In information warfare, the material aspect of information / propaganda etc, it used to facilitate such emotional experiences, reactions, shaping behavior that is destructive. But in essence, it's a spiritual attack.
Example: 2020-2021 Covid19 Psyop
Look at what was done to our entire populations with covid19 - it wasn't just psychological, but also spiritual (IMO).
People of faith especially understand this from experience. We know the devil sneaks up to you and whispers in your ear: "you're no good" "you are crap" "you are going to fail" God doesn't even love you" "your family doesn't love you" etc etc.
So how does the devil sneak up to the ears of a group? A community? A people? A population? What impact would it have? Answer: mass dooming. In the advanced stages, this becomes mass formation psychosis.
The Great Awakening is a war that is being waged in all dimensions: material, financial, economic, institutional, psychological, emotional, intellectual, spiritual.
So with that recent INTENSE wave of Dooming, do you think we are we on track, or what? I do. Over the target. The devil will hit you all the harder when you are over the target.
The Tweet, The Poll, The Concept, The Idea
And right now, Elon the Musk posts a tweet "Reinstate former President Trump"
Coincidence? Timing?
Technically, this is a statement, not a question. If it was a question, it would include a question mark (?).
"Reinstate former President Trump?"
If you know anything about hypnosis or NLP-like techniques, you can recognize the built-in ambiguity here, and ambiguity is a powerful tool for precipitating trance-like mental states. It does things to the mind. It opens doors, and pathways, and shuts down others.
On a conscious level, most people reading this, seeing this poll context, would go "oh, it's a poll about bringing DJT back to twitter". Which is what most people are responding to.
Some recognize, however, that the text itself is ambiguous. That ambiguity works on several levels.
- One, is this (really) about Twitter or is this actually about the White House (Presidency)?
Textually, ambiguous. The poll does NOT say what the reinstatement is to. People assume it's twitter, but is it? Ambiguous.
- On another level, more deeply, the ambiguity revolves around "is this a question, or is this a statement?"
If it's a question, then ostensibly, yes, it's simply a poll. But imagine if Musk just Tweeted this without the poll? What would it be saying?
It would be saying: "Reinstate former President Trump"
As in: Hey, United States! Reinstate former President Trump!!!
So which is it? Well, we don't know. It's ambiguous.But is that deliberate?
At the least, we can recognize here one aspect of how psychological operations work: even if people do not consciously realize it, on an unconscious level, the idea of, the very concept of, "reinstating Former President Donald Trump" somehow has now been imbedded in the thought processes of the audiences of this tweet. That's because an idea, once introduced, will often stay there until it is processed, removed, developed.
Example: Politician A debating another politician B
Politician A asks the question to his opponent, Politician B: "When did you stop beating your wife?" It is framed as a question "when did you stop?", but embedded in the question is a presupposition that B is beating his wife. And because the idea is embedded presupposition, it's harder to question or challenge it consciously.
IN the debate, B objects, and A withdraws the question. But now the concept, the idea of politician B beating his wife has been embedded in the psyche of the audience. It is there, as a seed, which potentially over time can germinate and grow. In the unconscious.
In my view, this is also how the Awakening happens. Long before an anon wakes up, God and the forces of good are constantly implanting ideas in the minds of people, ideas that germinate over time and grow until they break through the surface of the mind and emerge in the conscious realm.
The Matrix film illustrates this process when Morpheus says to Neo
“What you know you can't explain, but you feel it. You've felt it your entire life, that there's something wrong with the world. You don't know what it is, but it's there, like a splinter in your mind, driving you mad.”
So the idea of 'reinstating DJT' is now, on some level, either deliberately or accidentally (kek) being embedded into the thought processes of the twitter community and others around them. (Musk's tweet will genere waves of attention around the idea of "reinstatement" outside of Twitter as well. Just do a google search for the word "reinstate" and scroll down.
What's Going On Here?
Now, Musk is no dummy, right? According to reports/rumors, Musk is a highly functioning autist (on some level), right? If so, Musk HAS to be aware that his phrasing is ambiguous. If he is an autist, a thinking person, or a genius, he will have to be aware of this. To me, that implies that the choices are deliberate. How to further consider this?
It seems to me that in the context of everything that is going on over the last several months, and where we are today, there is a very real possibility that Musk is actually introducing the idea, the concept, of the reinstatement of Donald Trump to the presidency. He's doing it in a psyop type manner, creating a poll that is directly (and in my view, deliberately) embedding the language and the concept in the public square.
I mean, why else did Musk use that particular language? And what does "reinstate" actually mean?
reinstate /riːɪnˈsteɪt/ restore (someone or something) to their former position or state.
Why didn't Musk write something like:
Restore Former President Trump?
Unban Former President Trump?
Remove Ban From Former President Trump?
etc.
It's an interesting choice of words.
Ok, let's be devil's avocado for a minute.
Maybe this is merely a coincidence. Maybe Musk being the largest US gov contractor, Musk cozying up to Babylon Bee (Christian, conservative fun site), Musk acquiring Central DARPA CLOWN voice piece Twitter and flipping it on its head, the Storm intensifying for ALL - stakes getting higher, precipice looming, people and anons dooming, DJT doing a head fake throwing DOJ (and everyone else) off guard, triggering the DOJ to install a SC (he knew this was coming), and then Musk Tweeting the phrase "REINSTATE Former President Trump" are all just coincidences.
Maybe it's just a coincidence that devolution theory and anons have been hyper focused on "reinstating DJT" for the past 2 years and at this juncture, Musk posts for the entire twitterverse "reinstate".
Even IF it is a coincidence, heheh, it STILL embeds the idea of a Trump reinstatement. So, whether Musk did this consciously or unconsciously, it still serves the Plan as understood by Devolution Theory in a big way.
And, even IF it is a coincidence, it also functions as a marker for increased interaction between the awake anon thinking world and the normie thinking world. That interaction has been advancing more and more and more. Covid19 put the Great Awakening into a massive launch. The Collapse of Covid19 did it even more. The Lamestream Media has been unable to stop it, and Streisand Effect, only increased it, even as they attempt to 'debunk' and delegitimize Q.
So, no date fagging here. All I am saying is, that in the context of well, everything, this little tweet by musk seems kinda well, interdasting. Interdasting indeed, if you ask me.
But we'll have to wait and see. I mean, future proves past, right?
Either way, it seems to me like things are getting very spicy. So: ratchet up the memes, pedes. We go work to do!!!! Steady as she goes! WWG1WGA!
Q#4963
"Patriots in trusted positions. Trust yourself. You have seen the truth. Time to show the world."
Addendum
On the issue of the head fake, Praying Medic on Telegram writes this:
Let's analyze it logically:
Since Trump told us in advance the 2020 election would be stolen and it was, it logically follows that if he plans to return to the White House, it will be by a path other than another rigged election. Trump has no faith in that system.
But if he plans to make a surprise return, would you expect him (and his surrogates) to openly signal their plan to everyone?
Or would it be wiser to make everyone (including the deep state) think his path back to the White House will be another hard-fought, rigged election?
We're not going to get any clear, obvious statements from Trump or people close to him about the real plan to return.
We will however, get subtle confirmations through memes being re-truthed.
edit: typos
There is a difference between drawing conclusions about Satan and dooming, and historically/theologically accurate things that can be proven. For instance, saying, “Satan uses dooming against the anon community and Q team” is an example of something that is uncharacteristic of Satan. Does Satan cause doubt? Yes. Doubt in and about God (Genesis, Adam, Eve, the fall). Human beings are otherwise intimately responsible for their hearts, thoughts, words, and deeds (and doubts). Again, yes, Satan can and does cause doubt, but it is an overreach to equate human engineered predictions/theories/desires regarding Trump and his team, their resulting failures that lead to our doubt, and dooming, and then equate that with doubting assurance of salvation, or blinding people from the gospel by way of religion and doubt etc (things provable by the Word of God). Doubting the plethora of devolution theories is not an example of how Satan operates via doubt against God and His Word.
On the other hand, archeological discoveries corroborate Scripture, which concludes that things happened the way the Bible says (Scripture comports with reality). The Bible is historically accurate and much is provable, which is how God determined it would be. That very thing is what God has used to draw historians and skeptics to himself, hence Lee Strobel and countless others. Unfortunately, people like Flavius Josephus lived to see the destruction of the temple in 70 A.D. but still is the most credible historian. Did Satan use doubt and religion to blind him from the gospel? Yes. But again, that’s not the same as creating the argument of dooming and then forcing Satan to fit into that scenario to further the patriotic cause. Using Satan as a crutch to justify why people doom about wild theories removes and disregards reality, how things unfold, and the natural responses to those things… and just chalks it up to “oh, that’s just the devil.”
God never promised a human institution would save the world (especially in the devolutionary context). Additionally, God does not say our nation will prevent His judgment from falling on our nation or any other nations (judgment, broadly, being a concept provable and obvious, especially regarding the U.S, Israel, and other nations).
I’m sorry, but slapping a “mustard seed faith” on the DoD LOW, Q team, and the plan to save the world is invalid. Furthermore, doing all that for the mere sake of arguing against dooming (as some seem to do) is a massive waste of time and misuse of Scripture and faith all together.
....which is an overreach that YOU created, not I. (I never equated these things.)
You have misunderstood what I wrote. You have applied your own existing worldview/scripturalview and interpreted what I wrote inside that bubble, and in the process, both missed what I was saying and created a false concept about what I WAS saying. Which you then proceed to argue against! A pharisee technique if ever I saw one!
If you have never counselled someone in despair, or a teenager whose life is full of tragic experiences and who wants to commit suicide, then perhaps you simply cannot understand the point that the Devil is the father of despair.
I think you have completely misunderstood everything that I wrote, and the stance from which I wrote it.
But given our handle, I suspect that you actually see yourself as some kind of prophet, and are NOT open to the possibility that you have actually misunderstood what I wrote. Am I right?
That statement of mine was used as an analogy, speaking to the original issue of dooming about putting faith in man being the work of the devil versus real biblical doubt in God. That is the overreach I was referring to. Merely dooming in response to the failures of Trump and every other human, president, administration, cabal, etc., is not the same as the satanic influence of real doubt. That was my point because that was what I gleaned from your post. If I incorrectly believed you were saying dooming regarding humans/administrations etc., is the work of Satan, then I acknowledge my faulty perception of what you meant.
Thank you for the cordial reply. It is appreciated.
Perhaps I can clarify somewhat my thoughts on the matter.
I'm come back to this later today.
Of course, sir. I also want to be sure I’m understanding people (especially since it is a dark time for me and many as of late). Sleep will soon come and I’ll find your reply in the morning.
I think there are a multitude of different presuppositions between us that create very different interpretations, not only of scripture, or terms of expression, but also of events.
I think it is perfectly fine to disagree, and to agree to disagree. However, in the case of a multitude of differing presuppositions (such that the starting point for appraisal, aka worldview), it will very often be the case that there is such a difference in viewpoint (vantage point) that no real agreement or even disagreement will be possible, because (we) are looking at and talking about very different things.
For example, attempting to discuss the Plandemic issues from an anon viewpoint with a normie person often cannot proceed at all because the two vantage points are so radically different that the normie cannot even grasp what you are saying, and ends up denying it all because he has to CREATE an interpretation that he can conceive, and interpretation of what you are saying that is radically different from what you are actually saying.
I hope that makes sense.
So I think that rather than attempting to pin down whether there is even agreement or disagreement here, the more pressing necessity is to learn to identify our differing concepts, definitions, and language.
Let's start here: "Dooming about putting faith in man being the work of the devil"
As far as I can tell, I neither thought nor expressed that "dooming about putting faith in man" is the work of the devil.
I don't think we even have the same idea of "dooming". By dooming, I mean something like "experiencing an overwhelm of negative emotions causing faith or trust or belief to evaporate or slide out of reach". I would draw a strong distinction between that on the one hand and a) feeling discouraged, disappointed or despondent, which are natural and healthy responses in my view, and b) applying critical thinking and being critical of perceived failures, flaws or faults.
In this sense, to me, "dooming" means "responding or reacting to overwhelming or overpowering negative feelings such that one embraces a negative vision being promoted (by either a worldy presence or a spiritual presence)".
Example: Trump didn't deliver a big Q announcement! Oh, no! Shit. It's all false then. We're never going to get out of this! We are screwed! Trump is a failure! The United States is going to fall!
To me, that's an example of "dooming"?
It is worth noting, I think that I very likely do not share your concept of, or interpretation of scripture that, the nations are doomed and that the destruction of our nation's is a result of judgment by God. (That's what I got from your previous comment.)
I think our two views of what God's judgment is, how it is exacted, in what way, are very likely very different. Possibly, also how we view God as working through the world, both through the spiritual realms and angelic world, and also through His instruments on earth.
Anyway, for the record, My faith and belief is that judgment is and has been falling for many decades now, that the purpose of God's judgment is to separate the wheat from the chaff, such that the chaff suffer the unavoidable consequences of their choices, while the wheat are maintained, upheld and protected by God, and used to further His work.
So, putting aside whether we actually have the same concept of what dooming is, I never said that 'dooming' in response to failures by Trump or others is the same as satanic influence attempting to break someone's faith in God. They may overlap, but I do not think they are the same, unless someone responded to the current situation in this way: "Damn. I believed in Trump because I believe in God, and I can see now that Trump is a failure, so I must conclude that God does not exist!"
I think tho, that the core of misperception here is that we have two entirely different views of what exactly "dooming" is in the context of my post. Obviously, my post was written from the vantage point of what I mean by "dooming", not what you mean by "dooming", if indeed there is variance in how we see "dooming".
Thank you for elaborating on the issue more. This was helpful. It may very well be that we have differing views on eschatology, the extent of Satan’s authority and operation, God’s providential working in and through His creation and creatures and the subject of dooming. Personally, my study habits and learning were Berkhof, Grudem, MacArthur, and a multitude of others writings on Systematic Theology, and this is just to share some perspective and background on what helped shaped my understanding and lay the foundation for my Christian beliefs on various subjects on which the Bible speaks. Initially, I perceived your post as equating 2 mutually exclusive realities, as I see them. That was my error it seems. My apologies,
Although I’m not convinced faith in God and salvation can cease to exist (per the analogy you used: Trump failure = non-existence of God), as the scenario and context of my argument is based solely on the Christian biblical worldview (a genuine believer wrestling with the subject of dooming), I think I understand you’re drawing the distinction between faith in man and faith in God. I’m not necessarily saying you believe faith or salvation can be lost (as Scripture reveals God loses none of His own/His sheep)… Perhaps the analogy and quote slightly overstep the line to make the point very clear. Nevertheless, that clears things up and I’m appreciative of you taking the time to explain further. Much appreciated, anon. 🕊️
Additionally... The father of despair leading to suicide or serious trauma is, again, not equal to dooming about Trump/Biden/the cabal. If we must agree to disagree, I accept that also. I will not likely belabor and drag it out with a lengthy thread. I will easily just let it go and move on. I have never counseled someone in the context of dooming, that is true. Any and all personal counsel has been mostly matters of personal faith, doubt in God, doubting salvation, etc. I am content with that as my experience thus far.