I trust Flynn. He's bringing normies to the precipice to consider this. I think Anons are considered up to speed and this is not for us. FFS, the dude put out a manual on 5G warfare that anyone can buy. It's like people not trusting Trump when he's exposing everything the cabal is trying to do.
Let's posit this: Flynn in totally in the Plan, understand or is part of the Q operation. What are his objectives? What are the impacts he wants to have.
Early on, when the GA was catching on a growing, he wants to encourage anons to the greatest extent, because they are the troops the operation needs to activate first. So, he would naturally, engage on that level, do comms, say pledges, visit with the upcoming influencers, etc.
Later on, once the anon army was firmly established, he would want to be retraining his sights on the wider population that are waking up but which are not anons. He might make the evaluation that anons are firm, dedicated, and they just don't need his overt support as much as they once did. So, he would calibrate his approach and message for the next audience he's targeting, as it were.
It could be a case of, sure, some anons are not as savvy as they should be, and some are subject to dooming and doubting etc, BUT the schedule requires that I focus on the next step.
That would be military-grade thinking. Because in a war, you cannot afford to not push forward and sometimes - often - sacrifice is necessary because it is the big game, the whole enchilada that's at stake, not one battalion or regiment, etc. Sometimes, a commander in the field would have to just say, dammit, I hate it, but they're going have to fend for themselves. We have to push on.
Now, this is all simply speculation and reasoning, but I think given everything we know about Flynn, it's appropriate to consider multiple possibilities, to map them out, and see how the various viewpoints hold up.
From that perspective, Flynn's behavior MIGHT be explained by the above, especially if he is key or critical in the overall work of which Q operation is a part.
As regards "trusting". I think too many of us still work based on our emotional reactions, instead of applying critical thinking. "I trust him, I don't trust him" is often shaped by the emotional response. Instead, we should be looking at the impact the man has, and where.
If he says something that makes sense, then accept it. If he says something that doesn't, then don't accept it. Arriving at "I trust him" and then NOT thinking critically about what is being said and the postures being taken is really quite antithetical to the idea of fifth generation warfare, imo.
Emotions and intuition are extremely important indicators and it's not wise to underestimate their value in forming a complete and balanced plan of action. Balance is the key word. Balance.
Yes, I agree with that, with some caveat. In fact, from the post I recently put up, you can see that I place a high value on emotions as an indicator and key aspect of our personal development experience.
The problem (in my view) is that the balance is very much more often than not missing, imo. People lead with their emotions, instead of using those emotions for the purpose of understanding themselves. They take an emotional response to Flynn, for example, and act as if that somehow says more about Flynn than it does about them.
I'm certainly not advocating ignoring the emotions, but allow them to fulfill their correct purpose and avoid using them for what they are not too well designed.
Intuition I would liken to a compass. If the compass is tuned correctly to due north, invaluable. But if the compass is misaligned, then less than valuable. In other words, internal honesty, maturity, integrated understanding (integrating the intellect and emotions in a unified framework) is key to effectively accessing intuition.
I trust Flynn. He's bringing normies to the precipice to consider this. I think Anons are considered up to speed and this is not for us. FFS, the dude put out a manual on 5G warfare that anyone can buy. It's like people not trusting Trump when he's exposing everything the cabal is trying to do.
That thought occurs to me also.
Let's posit this: Flynn in totally in the Plan, understand or is part of the Q operation. What are his objectives? What are the impacts he wants to have.
Early on, when the GA was catching on a growing, he wants to encourage anons to the greatest extent, because they are the troops the operation needs to activate first. So, he would naturally, engage on that level, do comms, say pledges, visit with the upcoming influencers, etc.
Later on, once the anon army was firmly established, he would want to be retraining his sights on the wider population that are waking up but which are not anons. He might make the evaluation that anons are firm, dedicated, and they just don't need his overt support as much as they once did. So, he would calibrate his approach and message for the next audience he's targeting, as it were.
It could be a case of, sure, some anons are not as savvy as they should be, and some are subject to dooming and doubting etc, BUT the schedule requires that I focus on the next step.
That would be military-grade thinking. Because in a war, you cannot afford to not push forward and sometimes - often - sacrifice is necessary because it is the big game, the whole enchilada that's at stake, not one battalion or regiment, etc. Sometimes, a commander in the field would have to just say, dammit, I hate it, but they're going have to fend for themselves. We have to push on.
Now, this is all simply speculation and reasoning, but I think given everything we know about Flynn, it's appropriate to consider multiple possibilities, to map them out, and see how the various viewpoints hold up.
From that perspective, Flynn's behavior MIGHT be explained by the above, especially if he is key or critical in the overall work of which Q operation is a part.
As regards "trusting". I think too many of us still work based on our emotional reactions, instead of applying critical thinking. "I trust him, I don't trust him" is often shaped by the emotional response. Instead, we should be looking at the impact the man has, and where.
If he says something that makes sense, then accept it. If he says something that doesn't, then don't accept it. Arriving at "I trust him" and then NOT thinking critically about what is being said and the postures being taken is really quite antithetical to the idea of fifth generation warfare, imo.
Emotions and intuition are extremely important indicators and it's not wise to underestimate their value in forming a complete and balanced plan of action. Balance is the key word. Balance.
Yes, I agree with that, with some caveat. In fact, from the post I recently put up, you can see that I place a high value on emotions as an indicator and key aspect of our personal development experience.
https://greatawakening.win/p/16amYlvL45/the-information-war-is-a-psych/
The problem (in my view) is that the balance is very much more often than not missing, imo. People lead with their emotions, instead of using those emotions for the purpose of understanding themselves. They take an emotional response to Flynn, for example, and act as if that somehow says more about Flynn than it does about them.
I'm certainly not advocating ignoring the emotions, but allow them to fulfill their correct purpose and avoid using them for what they are not too well designed.
Intuition I would liken to a compass. If the compass is tuned correctly to due north, invaluable. But if the compass is misaligned, then less than valuable. In other words, internal honesty, maturity, integrated understanding (integrating the intellect and emotions in a unified framework) is key to effectively accessing intuition.
Yeah, the dude sucks. Mathematically.
True…. Temper this with facts too.
And the manual will have updates
Haha