Welcome to General Chat - GAW Community Area

Lots of discussion and opinions re: the gunman in the Washington Hilton / assassination attempt.

I began my personal red-pilling journey well before Q came on the scene, and Q certainly opened up many unseen vistas, and over the years, I've developed an approach to the info war that feels most suitable to me. In particular, seeing all the psyoppery going on everywhere, the matrix people functioning as they do, but also all the opinions and theories thrown around in the - let's call it - non-Matrix collective (although a good part of the collective has simply switched the big matrix for a bunch of smaller ones, I think), I've become quite skeptical of a lot of opinions that many seem to take for granted.

Primarily, my skepticism is born of what I consider to be a very shallow threshold of proof or evidence that some folks seem to adhere to when formulating their opinions (and theories). Give me a strong, solid framework of reasoning, balance, evidence and argument, and I'll think a lot more highly of the opinion or theory, even if I don't agree.

So, as per completely usual nowadays, the theories re: the Hilton incident raise their prominant heads. aka One, 'it's a psyop', Two, 'It's an inside job', Three, 'it's literally ALL a movie', Four, 'something doesn't make sense', etc.

But these days, folks seem to attach to their chosen theory willy-nilly. Almost 3 cm thick (aka extremely superficial or shallow) thresholds of analysis, reasoning, and evidence. aka Just go with your chosen bias and opinion about the whole infowar, and then adopt the theory that fits that most.

Hurrr.... I find it so frustrating, to be honest. At least when Q was on the scene, people who went with theories or came up with narratives that simply suited their a-priori inclinations, those folks got smashed on the Q board. Consequently, a great deal of the garbage was removed in the process. But here at GAW central, we have more of an emphasis on 'being nice'. Which is appropriate. Don't get me wrong. I'm just saying, this sure ain't the Q board, or the chans.

The problem I see is this: instead of a large scale tendency to examine the evidence, the data, to then analyse and come up with theories and conclusions, it seems like the theories and conclusions are all coming first, and then people pick and select the <ahem> data, 'evidence' and reasoning that fits into that.

Hurr...

In any case, the thought certainly occurs to me that, re: the Hilton Incident, yes, people are actually at a whole level of crazy these days, and yes, the propaganda matrix has surely twisted things so much that lunatics and completely unhinged folks would feel perfectly reasonable doing things that are unimaginable in an otherwise normal world.

In short, until more evidence, solid information and hardcore reasoning/analysis comes to light, I have no real opinion on the Hilton thing, except that perhaps, in reality, its entirely possible that this guy did what the normie narrative is portraying it as.

(I also think that Donald Trump actually risks his life on a daily basis, and there is enough insanity out there in the ether now that a loony twisted teacher from Cali could or world actually do <what they are telling us he did>. Time will tell.)