Everyone? How many globo-leftist social justice warriors now hate the pants of Elon, who was their darling just a year or two ago?
How about Soros?
What has Elon done since taking over the Twit house? He's exposed to the wide normie world the government collusion with Twitter Ver. 1, and by association, the entire issue of DARPA (aka DS govt) involvement with Silicon Valley and Big Tech. He continues to expose the bankruptcy of the Neo-Marxist leftist agenda, including all the wokeism, etc. He continually calls attention to the Cabal propaganda machine. He outed, to his target audience which includes so many of those on the left side of politics, Soros as a super villain. "He hates humanity".
And dozens of other things that ALL harm the Deep State Agenda, and the globalist NWO mission.
“If a kingdom is divided against itself, it cannot stand. If a house is divided against itself, it cannot stand.…"
And logically, why would he even take over Twit via a hostile takeover if NOT to advance the patriot agenda? Why not leave twitter as it was, with censorship, promoting all the globalist propaganda while banning all the opposing voices? For what reason would THEY want to take over what was already theirs, and then expose the sh*te out of it? Nah. That makes no sense.
But in the end, it makes no real difference if Musk is playing his role in support of the Great Awakening, or somehow is actually a Cabal sleeper. The net effect of what Musk has been doing with twitter has been deeply damaging to the DS/Globo agenda.
So again, if he's a deep state pidgeon, he's doing a terrible job. Because he's been a wrecking ball to so many of their main, key pillars, including the propaganda machine.
This doesn't mean you have to love Musk, or even like him. But it may be useful to put aside certain biases, and reflect on what things trigger you and where your evaluations are coming from. None of us are immune to biases. The best we should aspire to do is to be aware of them, and take them into account.
The only thing I would add: "When a high profile player makes the correct moves, they earn our praise. When they make incorrect moves, they earn our ire. This is why he's been pretty well liked on this board regarding the Twitter takeover and his moves afterwards."
What could Elons agenda be? To get most conservatives/right to support and endorse Destantis, like Elon’s been doing and very vocal about his support and his preference for Desantis over Trump, for the past two years…. But like everything that doesn’t fit the white hat narrative, it was dismissed as “optics”. Hell a lot of things that are deemed “optics” when it comes to just him (Elon).
A lot of anons are still censored and some are still banned Twitter. Not to mention there are several videos like 2000 Mules or particular x22 videos that are flagged and hidden from most users.
Elon wants to turn Twitter into an everything app just like Amazon. In order to be Amazon, you need consumers from all bases. Elon has the left regardless because he’s all about environment and fighting against “climate change”. Not to mention he’s working with Schumer on AI and future development (whom Elon says Schumer cares and does right for the American people, but ofc “optics” for no reason), actively working on bringing human brain implant chips (for “medical issues”), and is currently planning on building 5-10 milllion robots (whom he’s showcased and patented - they’re called Optimus) if “demand” meets it.
I just wish some anons would stop acting like it is virtually impossible for Elon to be a black hat/grey hat because he let SOME people back on Twitter and says the right things occasionally. I truly don’t see how he’s any different than Desantis, who Elon is very openly endorsing btw.
Hmmmm.... I don't know who dismissed this as optics, ("it was dismissed") so I cannot really comment on that.
I'll assume that you don't rule out the possibility of optics or their relevance in the context of the 5G war we are currently in. Where did we even hear about the idea of 'optics'? I don't know about you, but I first heard this word and the concept that goes with it from Q.
And, on that note, would you agree that if Musk is a DS instrument, that "he let SOME people back on Twitter and says the right things occasionally" would fall under the description of 'optics'?
Otherwise, why is he not censoring everyone who stands against the globalist agenda, like Twitter #1? Why would he speak out against the WEF, or CBCD, etc, or taut 'freedom of speech', unless, in your viewpoint, 'optics'?
I don't see how you can have it one way without the other. If he is capable of using 'optics' as a black hat, then he also must be capable of using 'optics' as a white hat, too, right? So any argument that "X cannot be actual optics, therefore Musk must be a Black hat" doesn't really hold water, logically.
You raise some interesting data points, some I don't really know about. I see that Musk said last year he would likely support Desantis in 2024, but recently it seems he's been throwing his support behind Sen. Tim Scott.
For some people the AI issue and the neural network stuff makes them just lump Musk in with the Transhumanists. Myself, after listening to Joe Rogan's talk with Musk on this topic, think that he raises some really important points (and warnings) and I think that as far as the human future is involved, Musk's thinking is infinitely better than that of the transhumanists like Huval, etc.
If there are anons who "think that it is virtually impossible" for musk to be a gray hat or black hat, I haven't see them. "Impossible" is such an incredibly polarizing word. But how about you? Do you think it is virtually impossible for Musk to be a White Hat?
"it is impossible for Musk to be a White Hat/Black Hat" are the same narrative, simply inverted. And if someone isn't able to acknowledge that ultimately, they just do not know - including you, admitting that you just do not know - then they aren't approaching the task of trying to understand what is going on and who is doing what (or what effect X person is having) logically, but rather emotionally. Because logically, neither you nor I nor anyone else here 'knows' what Elon is doing, or where he is headed.
Even if he says one thing, he might mean another, right? So really, all we can do is look at the data points, and work through them to try to reach some understanding, and then formulate an opinion based on that. Personally, that's what I would encourage any person to do. It doesn't mean we have to reach identical conclusions, but at a minimum, because neither you nor I can 'know' or for that matter very much influence what Musk does, we should really be focused on the PROCESS of how we go through the information and work it.
That's actually more important than the opinion we reach at the end, because the very root of the problem we are dealing with - the matrix of lies spun over decades and centuries - is that our thinking processes, and this includes how we have been primed to react to certain things, have been purposefully manipulated and programmed most of our lives.
So let's start there. Not whether Musk is a good guy or a bad guy, but how about how have I been programmed to think about Musk (for example)? What are my prejudices? Biases? Triggers? Beliefs?
For example, 24 months ago, I really knew very little about Musk. Almost nothing. I simply knew he existed, and had a presence in popular culture, etc.
(And, by the way, that was the same case of me with DJT in january of 2015. So when I heard about Trump running as a candidate, I thought it was a joke. What a joke this guy is, some Reality TV guy, billionaire. What changed was when I actually started listening to Trump. And, I started doing that because of how it became very clear that what the corporate media was saying about him and what he was saying directly contradicted the reality of what he WAS saying.)
So, prior to the twitter takeover, with Musk, I just thought he was some weird, quirky guy, a billionaire. But after tracking Q very closely for close to 5 years (started in Dec 2017), I've been through so much of the information war, observed so much, and had to reshape and reevaluate my thinking so much, and process so much emotionally, that I cannot help but try and look at Musk objectively.
Am I convinced one way or another? No. I really only ever work with "working hypotheses", but which I mean, I'll try to come up with what seems to me to be the most likely explanation for all the data points (aka information) that I see, and then I go with that as a working hypothesis. The only thing I am really convinced of 100% is that God chose DJT as his champion in this time. Everything else is simply a working hypothesis, some with 95% conviction, some with 80% conviction, some with 60% conviction, and some are like, nah, I don't really have a strong conviction about this theory one way or the other (< 50% conviction).
After all that, I want to raise something that I think it would benefit you to think about. You wrote: "But like everything that doesn’t fit the white hat narrative, it was dismissed as “optics”"
This suggests to me that you're not really understanding what some people are saying, or that your just reacting to it.
For example, if Musk is a white hat (i.e. is working to advance the cause of freedom of humanity from the Cabal, etc), why would such things as you reference 'not fit the white hat narrative'? You're asserting that Musk indicating support for DeSantis last year, and saying Trump should "hang up his spurs and move on", DON'T fit the white hat narrative. But why not?
If Musk is playing a role, part of that role could very well include keeping a distance from Trump, playing the role of a nonpartisan guy, etc.
The fact is, all such data points may either support the idea that Musk is black or Musk is white. Personally, if Musk IS playing a supporting role, I think he would BEST play that role by NOT being staunchly in Trump's camp, and NOT being so polarized politically, by working only with some parties and not others.
Looking at the broader field, I see people acting and playing roles everywhere. Trump vs Sessions was one of the earliest cases. Then Trump vs Barr. Then Kash, Flynn, etc, vs Q. Then, from late last year, Trump vs DeSantis. Is it all what it seems? I'm strongly convinced that a LOT of what is going on is not what it seems. People are playing roles, all designed for the purpose of waking up the people while advancing the agenda of destroying the deep state.
Of course, you cannot even think about these possibilities if you are emotionally reacting to the narratives that are being spun. But narratives ARE being spun, both by black hats and white hats. That's because this is 5th generational warfare. It's a psywar. It's a war for the minds of the public. One side wants to shut them down and stop them thinking for themselves. The other wants to wake them up, and get them thinking for themselves.
At this juncture, looking at the EFFECT of what Musk is doing, I think its far more logical to posit that he is playing a role and one that serves the freedom agenda, than the idea that he is a wolf in sheep's clothing, out to ensnare everyone by pretending to be a nice guy. Could I be wrong? Sure. But I might also be right. How can I know? I look at the information, try to work through it logically, and one part of that information is the gut feelings that I have gotten and which have been confirmed time and time again, constantly, over the past 6 years. I look at the information, look at how I am processing that information, what programs are running (or not) inside me, and then try to reach my best possible conclusion. What more can anyone do?
lol. Why is everyone praising Elon?
Everyone? How many globo-leftist social justice warriors now hate the pants of Elon, who was their darling just a year or two ago?
How about Soros?
What has Elon done since taking over the Twit house? He's exposed to the wide normie world the government collusion with Twitter Ver. 1, and by association, the entire issue of DARPA (aka DS govt) involvement with Silicon Valley and Big Tech. He continues to expose the bankruptcy of the Neo-Marxist leftist agenda, including all the wokeism, etc. He continually calls attention to the Cabal propaganda machine. He outed, to his target audience which includes so many of those on the left side of politics, Soros as a super villain. "He hates humanity".
And dozens of other things that ALL harm the Deep State Agenda, and the globalist NWO mission.
“If a kingdom is divided against itself, it cannot stand. If a house is divided against itself, it cannot stand.…"
And logically, why would he even take over Twit via a hostile takeover if NOT to advance the patriot agenda? Why not leave twitter as it was, with censorship, promoting all the globalist propaganda while banning all the opposing voices? For what reason would THEY want to take over what was already theirs, and then expose the sh*te out of it? Nah. That makes no sense.
But in the end, it makes no real difference if Musk is playing his role in support of the Great Awakening, or somehow is actually a Cabal sleeper. The net effect of what Musk has been doing with twitter has been deeply damaging to the DS/Globo agenda.
So again, if he's a deep state pidgeon, he's doing a terrible job. Because he's been a wrecking ball to so many of their main, key pillars, including the propaganda machine.
This doesn't mean you have to love Musk, or even like him. But it may be useful to put aside certain biases, and reflect on what things trigger you and where your evaluations are coming from. None of us are immune to biases. The best we should aspire to do is to be aware of them, and take them into account.
The only thing I would add: "When a high profile player makes the correct moves, they earn our praise. When they make incorrect moves, they earn our ire. This is why he's been pretty well liked on this board regarding the Twitter takeover and his moves afterwards."
Youve been on a roll the last few days, brother.
Kek, Longtime. Kek.
What could Elons agenda be? To get most conservatives/right to support and endorse Destantis, like Elon’s been doing and very vocal about his support and his preference for Desantis over Trump, for the past two years…. But like everything that doesn’t fit the white hat narrative, it was dismissed as “optics”. Hell a lot of things that are deemed “optics” when it comes to just him (Elon).
A lot of anons are still censored and some are still banned Twitter. Not to mention there are several videos like 2000 Mules or particular x22 videos that are flagged and hidden from most users.
Elon wants to turn Twitter into an everything app just like Amazon. In order to be Amazon, you need consumers from all bases. Elon has the left regardless because he’s all about environment and fighting against “climate change”. Not to mention he’s working with Schumer on AI and future development (whom Elon says Schumer cares and does right for the American people, but ofc “optics” for no reason), actively working on bringing human brain implant chips (for “medical issues”), and is currently planning on building 5-10 milllion robots (whom he’s showcased and patented - they’re called Optimus) if “demand” meets it. I just wish some anons would stop acting like it is virtually impossible for Elon to be a black hat/grey hat because he let SOME people back on Twitter and says the right things occasionally. I truly don’t see how he’s any different than Desantis, who Elon is very openly endorsing btw.
Hmmmm.... I don't know who dismissed this as optics, ("it was dismissed") so I cannot really comment on that.
I'll assume that you don't rule out the possibility of optics or their relevance in the context of the 5G war we are currently in. Where did we even hear about the idea of 'optics'? I don't know about you, but I first heard this word and the concept that goes with it from Q.
And, on that note, would you agree that if Musk is a DS instrument, that "he let SOME people back on Twitter and says the right things occasionally" would fall under the description of 'optics'?
Otherwise, why is he not censoring everyone who stands against the globalist agenda, like Twitter #1? Why would he speak out against the WEF, or CBCD, etc, or taut 'freedom of speech', unless, in your viewpoint, 'optics'?
I don't see how you can have it one way without the other. If he is capable of using 'optics' as a black hat, then he also must be capable of using 'optics' as a white hat, too, right? So any argument that "X cannot be actual optics, therefore Musk must be a Black hat" doesn't really hold water, logically.
You raise some interesting data points, some I don't really know about. I see that Musk said last year he would likely support Desantis in 2024, but recently it seems he's been throwing his support behind Sen. Tim Scott.
For some people the AI issue and the neural network stuff makes them just lump Musk in with the Transhumanists. Myself, after listening to Joe Rogan's talk with Musk on this topic, think that he raises some really important points (and warnings) and I think that as far as the human future is involved, Musk's thinking is infinitely better than that of the transhumanists like Huval, etc.
If there are anons who "think that it is virtually impossible" for musk to be a gray hat or black hat, I haven't see them. "Impossible" is such an incredibly polarizing word. But how about you? Do you think it is virtually impossible for Musk to be a White Hat?
"it is impossible for Musk to be a White Hat/Black Hat" are the same narrative, simply inverted. And if someone isn't able to acknowledge that ultimately, they just do not know - including you, admitting that you just do not know - then they aren't approaching the task of trying to understand what is going on and who is doing what (or what effect X person is having) logically, but rather emotionally. Because logically, neither you nor I nor anyone else here 'knows' what Elon is doing, or where he is headed.
Even if he says one thing, he might mean another, right? So really, all we can do is look at the data points, and work through them to try to reach some understanding, and then formulate an opinion based on that. Personally, that's what I would encourage any person to do. It doesn't mean we have to reach identical conclusions, but at a minimum, because neither you nor I can 'know' or for that matter very much influence what Musk does, we should really be focused on the PROCESS of how we go through the information and work it.
That's actually more important than the opinion we reach at the end, because the very root of the problem we are dealing with - the matrix of lies spun over decades and centuries - is that our thinking processes, and this includes how we have been primed to react to certain things, have been purposefully manipulated and programmed most of our lives.
So let's start there. Not whether Musk is a good guy or a bad guy, but how about how have I been programmed to think about Musk (for example)? What are my prejudices? Biases? Triggers? Beliefs?
For example, 24 months ago, I really knew very little about Musk. Almost nothing. I simply knew he existed, and had a presence in popular culture, etc.
(And, by the way, that was the same case of me with DJT in january of 2015. So when I heard about Trump running as a candidate, I thought it was a joke. What a joke this guy is, some Reality TV guy, billionaire. What changed was when I actually started listening to Trump. And, I started doing that because of how it became very clear that what the corporate media was saying about him and what he was saying directly contradicted the reality of what he WAS saying.)
So, prior to the twitter takeover, with Musk, I just thought he was some weird, quirky guy, a billionaire. But after tracking Q very closely for close to 5 years (started in Dec 2017), I've been through so much of the information war, observed so much, and had to reshape and reevaluate my thinking so much, and process so much emotionally, that I cannot help but try and look at Musk objectively.
Am I convinced one way or another? No. I really only ever work with "working hypotheses", but which I mean, I'll try to come up with what seems to me to be the most likely explanation for all the data points (aka information) that I see, and then I go with that as a working hypothesis. The only thing I am really convinced of 100% is that God chose DJT as his champion in this time. Everything else is simply a working hypothesis, some with 95% conviction, some with 80% conviction, some with 60% conviction, and some are like, nah, I don't really have a strong conviction about this theory one way or the other (< 50% conviction).
After all that, I want to raise something that I think it would benefit you to think about. You wrote: "But like everything that doesn’t fit the white hat narrative, it was dismissed as “optics”"
This suggests to me that you're not really understanding what some people are saying, or that your just reacting to it.
For example, if Musk is a white hat (i.e. is working to advance the cause of freedom of humanity from the Cabal, etc), why would such things as you reference 'not fit the white hat narrative'? You're asserting that Musk indicating support for DeSantis last year, and saying Trump should "hang up his spurs and move on", DON'T fit the white hat narrative. But why not?
If Musk is playing a role, part of that role could very well include keeping a distance from Trump, playing the role of a nonpartisan guy, etc.
The fact is, all such data points may either support the idea that Musk is black or Musk is white. Personally, if Musk IS playing a supporting role, I think he would BEST play that role by NOT being staunchly in Trump's camp, and NOT being so polarized politically, by working only with some parties and not others.
Looking at the broader field, I see people acting and playing roles everywhere. Trump vs Sessions was one of the earliest cases. Then Trump vs Barr. Then Kash, Flynn, etc, vs Q. Then, from late last year, Trump vs DeSantis. Is it all what it seems? I'm strongly convinced that a LOT of what is going on is not what it seems. People are playing roles, all designed for the purpose of waking up the people while advancing the agenda of destroying the deep state.
Of course, you cannot even think about these possibilities if you are emotionally reacting to the narratives that are being spun. But narratives ARE being spun, both by black hats and white hats. That's because this is 5th generational warfare. It's a psywar. It's a war for the minds of the public. One side wants to shut them down and stop them thinking for themselves. The other wants to wake them up, and get them thinking for themselves.
At this juncture, looking at the EFFECT of what Musk is doing, I think its far more logical to posit that he is playing a role and one that serves the freedom agenda, than the idea that he is a wolf in sheep's clothing, out to ensnare everyone by pretending to be a nice guy. Could I be wrong? Sure. But I might also be right. How can I know? I look at the information, try to work through it logically, and one part of that information is the gut feelings that I have gotten and which have been confirmed time and time again, constantly, over the past 6 years. I look at the information, look at how I am processing that information, what programs are running (or not) inside me, and then try to reach my best possible conclusion. What more can anyone do?
Elon isn't alone in being defended for making seemingly wrong moves because 'optics'. There's also Trump.