https://bioclandestine.substack.com/p/the-enemy-told-me-everything
The Enemy Told Me Everything
People ask me all the time how I got so deep into Ukraine, and how I knew to look where I was looking.
The enemy told me.
They told on themselves, when they unleashed an Orwellian censorship campaign on me, for getting too close to the answer.
Their panic showed me the way.
I wrote one viral Twitter thread about US-funded biolabs in Ukraine, it caused a global media stir, I was nuked on all social media simultaneously, IP addresses blacklisted, MSM/fact-checkers wrote hundreds of articles ‘debunking’ me, and the US government started wiping their own embassy pages where I got the information. Only for Victoria Nuland herself to prove me correct, just a couple weeks later in public testimony.
At that moment in February 2022, I knew that I had stumbled onto something way bigger than I had ever imagined, and found myself right in the middle of it. So I abandoned my job, dedicated everything to independent journalism, and I’ve been hellbent on exposing it ever since.
The enemy’s reaction confirmed they were desperate to cover this up for whatever reason, and destroyed my life for getting too close to their secret. You receive the most flak when over the target, and boy, did I receive a lot of flak.
So if you’re ever wondering why it is I’m obsessed with Ukraine, it’s because the enemy told me that this is what they fear most.
It’s not a guess.
Okay, maybe so. But, if he is posing as a leader, where is he leading? At worst, it seems to be a search for anyone who will listen to him and pay heed. I get the impression that he started on this path without being prompted by exposure to Q.
Kind of like the little boy in the story who cried "Wolf!"---but sincerely---was beaten down and muzzled, then arrives at a time when what he tried to advance has become more widely known. Maybe this is "I told you so," to a friendly audience. My question is, "So, what then?" If he has nothing new to say, his message is Old News. If he has no advice, he has nowhere to lead. Maybe, he is temporarily trapped in his present modus vivendi of "Clandestine" journalist and has no way out.
One thing I've found about leadership is that if you are not going somewhere, you are not leading anyone. There are people who want attention, but if they are not going anywhere, they are not leaders. It's important to make the distinction. (Hint: "Leaders" lead, and they don't depend on followers. They're going.)
I'll start by saying that I have no idea if he's a bad actor.
That being said, his initial exposure to the world as he self-doxxed himself was being revealed on Alex Jones. That is potentially a red flag.
The fear is that he gathers a following, then does something stupid to the detriment of the Q community.
There's many examples of this.
Jack Posobiec was often quoted by this community. Eventually, he came out and said "Oh, by the way, I know who Q is. It was a friend of mine named Microchip. It was a hoax we perpetrated on you all. Ooops, my bad."
The method, in psychology, is called pace and lead. The person who is attempting to influence you starts by mimicking you, or "pacing" you. Then, after you say to yourself "this person thinks the same things I do, I believe the things he says", that is when they switch to the "lead" part, which is to lead you away from what you used to believe, in the above instance that Q is actually legit.
A second example. In the days of Q being on reddit, there was a guy named SerialBrain2 (or SB2). One day he gained fame in the Q community when Q directly referenced one of his posts, that a certain individual was grifting on the Q community. His popularity rose, his posts became more popular. Then he got very weird.
He got hung up on gematria, and started weaving together wild narratives of things going on behind the scenes with Q and Trump based on wild leaps of logic based on counting letters in Trump posts. Quite frankly, he was an idiot, and he tarnished all Q followers simply by association.
Third example, NeonRevolt. This guy was a "decoder" and worked hard building a following. Long story short, by the end he was scolding Q, scolding Trump, encouraging everyone to abandon the community because things weren't going exactly the way he wanted to.
Fourth example, Ron Watkins, aka CodeMonkeyZ. He went out of his way to position himself at the top of the Q community. Whether cognizant or not, he ended up going to HBO to be mocked and derided, and suddenly all the flaws of Ron Watkins became the flaws of the entire Q movement.
I could go on and on, but the gist of it is this: there's a huge downside to having someone attempt to become a leader/influencer in the Q community. There's ZERO upside.
What would have happened if Clandestine went to 4chan/8chan/other boards frequented by anons and presented the data without seeking fame and recognition? He would have accomplished the exact same thing, without any of the drama.
Sounds like a good answer to me. I wasn't familiar with all the past tropes, hopes, and dopes. I had no idea where he wanted to lead, and you tend to reinforce my thinking that he doesn't know, himself.
Seeking "leadership" is a self-inflicted poison that unfortunately has bad results all around. From what I have seen of Q's posts, I would not say that he is even seeking leadership. He's just letting us know. And, if anything, advising his auditors not to get engaged in anything rash or demonstrative.
Thanks for the elaboration.