We don't know. There's been no clear answer to that question, from Q or any other. On 8chan, Q trusted CM (CodeMonkeyZ, Ron Watkins) enough to pat him on the back:
That is extraordinarily suspicious to me, to both avoid any answer to the obvious question while praising the guy everyone is suspicious of.
Q only required mods not have any operational control over the thread.
But since Watkins apparently maintained admin control of 8chan beyond that of Q, then Q had no way of enforcing this. Did Q trust, but forget to verify?
If Q themselves set it up, there would be no anonymity. Q can't have a paper trail to function. Plausible Deniability must be maintained. If Q were a Military Operation, revealing certain details about the government would be treason, regardless of clearance level. That's why the Chans were the chosen platform to begin with, because they allowed full anonymity and laxness in censorship.
I'm sorry, but I just plain don't accept this argument.
Chans are not complicated pieces of software. They are not hard to set up. And it's not hard for any group with experience and resources to set up a secure website that protects the identity of its owners. This community believes that governments routinely set up false flags and other fronts to conceal their involvement in secret operations.
Are you really telling me that the Q Team, despite having been pulled from these same government and military officials, lacks the expertise to create a site with anonymous ownership? That our digital soldiers have to rely on the expertise of Watkins for their security?
That's... a shockingly poor assessment of the Q Team's technological capabilities, even beyond what I would suggest.
All this talk of dates "coming and going" are BS. Just because something hasn't happened yet, doesn't mean it won't happen. I'm tired of people using that same failed argument of "none of Q's predictions come true." Which ones? Give me a few to reference.
The predictions are absolutely there, but they aren't falsifiable. Which is why nobody can directly disprove Q: "disinformation is necessary" pretty much means that anything you don't like from Q World, you can toss out as probably irrelevant.
And since deltas are apparently allowed to be considered valid, then Q can say, "midterms are safe" (1197: 4/19/18), have that prediction fail, and then afterward say, "Oh, I was talking about 2022, not the 2018 election that was coming up when I made that prediction” (2620: 12/12/18).
The fact is that if you accept a prediction on the basis that it will EVENTUALLY come true, without knowing anything about HOW or WHEN it will come true, or what specific events will prove that it's happening, then you're allowed to wait literally forever for the Plan and still never be proven wrong.
I could come visit you on your deathbed in however many decades it would be, and you could still technically jab at me that I haven't proven Q's predictions wrong. It just might be operating on a 17 year delta.
Which is why Q seems to me to require faith, and I don't really like faith in my research movements.
Do you know the phrase "Military is the only way?"
Actually, I already made this argument for you. :)
https://greatawakening.win/p/15IXpKkAgj/x/c/4OZqiNb1XPz
Why are the media choosing NOW to cover Q's return, when there have been previous "returns" from imposters since his absence?
I did answer your question, but I'll be clearer.
The media is watching you, not Q. They care about the Q community.
And due to the trip codes and such, the Q community is far more trusting of this particular variation of Q than previous returns.
The media is reporting on it because the Q people think it's news, and as this board has fondly said, you are the news now. What you think about Q's return IS news, and lots of people think he's returned. Which means lots of people think the Plan is about to kick off, which means the media is going to be interested in reporting on those people.
When I was a kid, I remember watching a doomsday cult on the news. They had sold their possessions, said goodbye to their family, and smugly told everyone else they were going to hell.
So of course the news cameras were rolling when the prophesized doomsday came and went. Everyone wanted to see the faces of the believers.
The cameras are pointed at you because the news wants to see your face when you're proven wrong, just as badly as everyone here wants to see me and people like me when I'm proven wrong.
What story did Q tell? Honestly, tell me what you think, because I have no idea what you think Q has said, so I cannot confirm or deny your stance's validity on the matter.
Most generally, Q not only supported Trump's allegations of a Deep State working specifically against him and his role in fighting them, but promised an inevitable victory. Most generally.
But at the end of the day, it doesn't really matter what I believe about Q's posts. It matters what the Q community does with those posts. Q never talked much about COVID or the vaccine, considering how huge it a deal it became. Q never really discussed biolabs in Ukraine being the first shots in the hot war against the Cabal.
So why are people talking about these things here as if Q endorsed them?
Probably because if they ONLY stuck to the stuff Q talked about directly, then it would appear that the world quite moved on without Q. If Q never talked about COVID, then was he surprised by COVID? Was this not accounted for in the Plan?
I don't see a strong interest in exploring that theory here. But perhaps I'm wrong.
We don't know. There's been no clear answer to that question, from Q or any other. On 8chan, Q trusted CM (CodeMonkeyZ, Ron Watkins) enough to pat him on the back:
That is extraordinarily suspicious to me, to both avoid any answer to the obvious question while praising the guy everyone is suspicious of.
Q only required mods not have any operational control over the thread.
But since Watkins apparently maintained admin control of 8chan beyond that of Q, then Q had no way of enforcing this. Did Q trust, but forget to verify?
If Q themselves set it up, there would be no anonymity. Q can't have a paper trail to function. Plausible Deniability must be maintained. If Q were a Military Operation, revealing certain details about the government would be treason, regardless of clearance level. That's why the Chans were the chosen platform to begin with, because they allowed full anonymity and laxness in censorship.
I'm sorry, but I just plain don't accept this argument.
Chans are not complicated pieces of software. They are not hard to set up. And it's not hard for any group with experience and resources to set up a secure website that protects the identity of its owners. This community believes that governments routinely set up false flags and other fronts to conceal their involvement in secret operations.
Are you really telling me that the Q Team, despite having been pulled from these same government and military officials, lacks the expertise to create a site with anonymous ownership? That our digital soldiers have to rely on the expertise of Watkins for their security?
That's... a shockingly poor assessment of the Q Team's technological capabilities, even beyond what I would suggest.
All this talk of dates "coming and going" are BS. Just because something hasn't happened yet, doesn't mean it won't happen. I'm tired of people using that same failed argument of "none of Q's predictions come true." Which ones? Give me a few to reference.
The predictions are absolutely there, but they aren't falsifiable. Which is why nobody can directly disprove Q: "disinformation is necessary" pretty much means that anything you don't like from Q World, you can toss out as probably irrelevant.
And since deltas are apparently allowed to be considered valid, then Q can say, "midterms are safe" (1197: 4/19/18), have that prediction fail, and then afterward say, "Oh, I was talking about 2022, not the 2018 election that was coming up when I made that prediction” (2620: 12/12/18).
The fact is that if you accept a prediction on the basis that it will EVENTUALLY come true, without knowing anything about HOW or WHEN it will come true, or what specific events will prove that it's happening, then you're allowed to wait literally forever for the Plan and still never be proven wrong.
I could come visit you on your deathbed in however many decades it would be, and you could still technically jab at me that I haven't proven Q's predictions wrong. It just might be operating on a 17 year delta.
Which is why Q seems to me to require faith, and I don't really like faith in my research movements.
Do you know the phrase "Military is the only way?"
Actually, I already made this argument for you. :)
https://greatawakening.win/p/15IXpKkAgj/x/c/4OZqiNb1XPz
Why are the media choosing NOW to cover Q's return, when there have been previous "returns" from imposters since his absence?
I did answer your question, but I'll be clearer.
The media is watching you, not Q. They care about the Q community.
And due to the trip codes and such, the Q community is far more trusting of this particular variation of Q than previous returns.
The media is reporting on it because the Q people think it's news, and as this board has fondly said, you are the news now. What you think about Q's return IS news, and lots of people think he's returned. Which means lots of people think the Plan is about to kick off, which means the media is going to be interested in reporting on those people.
When I was a kid, I remember watching a doomsday cult on the news. They had sold their possessions, said goodbye to their family, and smugly told everyone else they were going to hell.
So of course the news cameras were rolling when the prophesized doomsday came and went. Everyone wanted to see the faces of the believers.
The cameras are pointed at you because the news wants to see your face when you're proven wrong, just as badly as everyone here wants to see me and people like me when I'm proven wrong.
What story did Q tell? Honestly, tell me what you think, because I have no idea what you think Q has said, so I cannot confirm or deny your stance's validity on the matter.
Most generally, Q not only supported Trump's allegations of a Deep State working specifically against him and his role in fighting them, but promised an inevitable victory. Most generally.
But at the end of the day, it doesn't really matter what I believe about Q's posts. It matters what the Q community does with those posts. Q never talked about COVID or the vaccine, despite these apparently being vital parts of the play. Q never really discussed biolabs in Ukraine being the first shots in the hot war against the Cabal.
So why are people talking about these things here as if Q endorsed them?
Probably because if they ONLY stuck to the stuff Q talked about directly, then it would appear that the world quite moved on without Q. If Q never talked about COVID, then was he surprised by COVID? Was this not accounted for in the Plan?
I don't see a strong interest in exploring that theory here. But perhaps I'm wrong.
We don't know. There's been no clear answer to that question, from Q or any other. On 8chan, Q trusted CM (CodeMonkeyZ, Ron Watkins) enough to pat him on the back:
That is extraordinarily suspicious to me, to both avoid any answer to the obvious question while praising the guy everyone is suspicious of.
Q only required mods not have any operational control over the thread.
But since Watkins apparently maintained admin control of 8chan beyond that of Q, then Q had no way of enforcing this. Did Q trust, but forget to verify?
If Q themselves set it up, there would be no anonymity. Q can't have a paper trail to function. Plausible Deniability must be maintained. If Q were a Military Operation, revealing certain details about the government would be treason, regardless of clearance level. That's why the Chans were the chosen platform to begin with, because they allowed full anonymity and laxness in censorship.
I'm sorry, but I just plain don't accept this argument.
Chans are not complicated pieces of software. They are not hard to set up. And it's not hard for any group with experience and resources to set up a secure website that protects the identity of its owners. This community believes that governments routinely set up false flags and other fronts to conceal their involvement in secret operations.
Are you really telling me that the Q Team, despite having been pulled from these same government and military officials, lacks the expertise to create a site with anonymous ownership? That our digital soldiers have to rely on the expertise of Watkins for their security?
That's... a shockingly poor assessment of the Q Team's technological capabilities, even beyond what I would suggest.
All this talk of dates "coming and going" are BS. Just because something hasn't happened yet, doesn't mean it won't happen. I'm tired of people using that same failed argument of "none of Q's predictions come true." Which ones? Give me a few to reference.
The predictions are absolutely there, but they aren't falsifiable. Which is why nobody can directly disprove Q: "disinformation is necessary" pretty much means that anything you don't like from Q World, you can toss out as probably irrelevant.
And since deltas are apparently allowed to be considered valid, then Q can say, "midterms are safe", have that prediction fail, and then afterward say, "Oh, I was talking about 2022, not the 2018 election that was coming up when I made that prediction."
The fact is that if you accept a prediction on the basis that it will EVENTUALLY come true, without knowing anything about HOW or WHEN it will come true, or what specific events will prove that it's happening, then you're allowed to wait literally forever for the Plan and still never be proven wrong.
I could come visit you on your deathbed in however many decades it would be, and you could still technically jab at me that I haven't proven Q's predictions wrong. It just might be operating on a 17 year delta.
Which is why Q seems to me to require faith, and I don't really like faith in my research movements.
Do you know the phrase "Military is the only way?"
Actually, I already made this argument for you. :)
https://greatawakening.win/p/15IXpKkAgj/x/c/4OZqiNb1XPz
Why are the media choosing NOW to cover Q's return, when there have been previous "returns" from imposters since his absence?
I did answer your question, but I'll be clearer.
The media is watching you, not Q. They care about the Q community.
And due to the trip codes and such, the Q community is far more trusting of this particular variation of Q than previous returns.
The media is reporting on it because the Q people think it's news, and as this board has fondly said, you are the news now. What you think about Q's return IS news, and lots of people think he's returned. Which means lots of people think the Plan is about to kick off, which means the media is going to be interested in reporting on those people.
When I was a kid, I remember watching a doomsday cult on the news. They had sold their possessions, said goodbye to their family, and smugly told everyone else they were going to hell.
So of course the news cameras were rolling when the prophesized doomsday came and went. Everyone wanted to see the faces of the believers.
The cameras are pointed at you because the news wants to see your face when you're proven wrong, just as badly as everyone here wants to see me and people like me when I'm proven wrong.
What story did Q tell? Honestly, tell me what you think, because I have no idea what you think Q has said, so I cannot confirm or deny your stance's validity on the matter.
Most generally, Q not only supported Trump's allegations of a Deep State working specifically against him and his role in fighting them, but promised an inevitable victory. Most generally.
But at the end of the day, it doesn't really matter what I believe about Q's posts. It matters what the Q community does with those posts. Q never talked about COVID or the vaccine, despite these apparently being vital parts of the play. Q never really discussed biolabs in Ukraine being the first shots in the hot war against the Cabal.
So why are people talking about these things here as if Q endorsed them?
Probably because if they ONLY stuck to the stuff Q talked about directly, then it would appear that the world quite moved on without Q. If Q never talked about COVID, then was he surprised by COVID? Was this not accounted for in the Plan?
I don't see a strong interest in exploring that theory here. But perhaps I'm wrong.
We don't know. There's been no clear answer to that question, from Q or any other. On 8chan, Q trusted CM (CodeMonkeyZ, Ron Watkins) enough to pat him on the back:
That is extraordinarily suspicious to me, to both avoid any answer to the obvious question while praising the guy everyone is suspicious of.
Q only required mods not have any operational control over the thread.
But since Watkins apparently maintained admin control of 8chan beyond that of Q, then Q had no way of enforcing this. Did Q trust, but forget to verify?
If Q themselves set it up, there would be no anonymity. Q can't have a paper trail to function. Plausible Deniability must be maintained. If Q were a Military Operation, revealing certain details about the government would be treason, regardless of clearance level. That's why the Chans were the chosen platform to begin with, because they allowed full anonymity and laxness in censorship.
I'm sorry, but I just plain don't accept this argument.
Chans are not complicated pieces of software. They are not hard to set up. And it's not hard for any group with experience and resources to set up a secure website that protects the identity of its owners. This community believes that governments routinely set up false flags and other fronts to conceal their involvement in secret operations.
Are you really telling me that the Q Team, despite having been pulled from these same government and military officials, lacks the expertise to create a site with anonymous ownership? That our digital soldiers have to rely on the expertise of Watkins for their security?
That's... a shockingly poor assessment of the Q Team's technological capabilities, even beyond what I would suggest.
All this talk of dates "coming and going" are BS. Just because something hasn't happened yet, doesn't mean it won't happen. I'm tired of people using that same failed argument of "none of Q's predictions come true." Which ones? Give me a few to reference.
The predictions are absolutely there, but they aren't falsifiable. Which is why nobody can directly disprove Q: "disinformation is necessary" pretty much means that anything you don't like from Q World, you can toss out as probably irrelevant.
And since deltas are apparently allowed to be considered valid, then Q can say, "midterms are safe", have that prediction fail, and then afterward say, "Oh, I was talking about 2022, not the 2018 election that was coming up when I made that prediction."
The fact is that if you accept a prediction on the basis that it will EVENTUALLY come true, without knowing anything about HOW or WHEN it will come true, or what specific events will prove that it's happening, then you're allowed to wait literally forever for the Plan and still never be proven wrong.
I could come visit you on your deathbed in however many decades it would be, and you could still technically jab at me that I haven't proven Q's predictions wrong. It just might be operating on a 17 year delta.
Which is why Q seems to me to require faith, and I don't really like faith in my research movements.
Do you know the phrase "Military is the only way?"
Actually, I already made this argument for you. :)
https://greatawakening.win/p/15IXpKkAgj/x/c/4OZqiNb1XPz
Why are the media choosing NOW to cover Q's return, when there have been previous "returns" from imposters since his absence?
I did answer your question, but I'll be clearer.
The media is watching you, not Q. They care about the Q community.
And due to the trip codes and such, the Q community is far more trusting of this particular variation of Q than previous returns.
The media is reporting on it because the Q people think it's news, and as this board has fondly said, you are the news now. What you think about Q's return IS news, and lots of people think he's returned. Which means lots of people think the Plan is about to kick off, which means the media is going to be interested in reporting on those people.
When I was a kid, I remember watching a doomsday cult on the news. They had sold their possessions, said goodbye to their family, and smugly told everyone else they were going to hell.
So of course the news cameras were rolling when the prophesized doomsday came and went. Everyone wanted to see the faces of the believers.
The cameras are pointed at you because the news wants to see your face when you're proven wrong, just as badly as everyone here wants to see me and people like me when I'm proven wrong.
What story did Q tell? Honestly, tell me what you think, because I have no idea what you think Q has said, so I cannot confirm or deny your stance's validity on the matter.
Most generally, Q not only supported Trump's allegations of a Deep State working specifically against him and his role in fighting them, but promised an inevitable victory. Most generally.
But at the end of the day, it doesn't really matter what I believe about Q's posts. It matters what the Q community does with those posts. Q never talked about COVID or the vaccine, despite these apparently being vital parts of the play. Q never really discussed biolabs in Ukraine being first hot war.
So why are people talking about these things here as if Q endorsed them?
Probably because if they ONLY stuck to the stuff Q talked about directly, then it would appear that the world quite moved on without Q. If Q never talked about COVID, then was he surprised by COVID? Was this not accounted for in the Plan?
I don't see a strong interest in exploring that theory here. But perhaps I'm wrong.
We don't know. There's been no clear answer to that question, from Q or any other. On 8chan, Q trusted CM (CodeMonkeyZ, Ron Watkins) enough to pat him on the back:
That is extraordinarily suspicious to me, to both avoid any answer to the obvious question while praising the guy everyone is suspicious of.
Q only required mods not have any operational control over the thread.
But since Watkins apparently maintained admin control of 8chan beyond that of Q, then Q had no way of enforcing this. Did Q trust, but forget to verify?
If Q themselves set it up, there would be no anonymity. Q can't have a paper trail to function. Plausible Deniability must be maintained. If Q were a Military Operation, revealing certain details about the government would be treason, regardless of clearance level. That's why the Chans were the chosen platform to begin with, because they allowed full anonymity and laxness in censorship.
I'm sorry, but I just plain don't accept this argument.
Chans are not complicated pieces of software. They are not hard to set up. And it's not hard for any group with experience and resources to set up a secure website that protects the identity of its owners. This community believes that governments routinely set up false flags and other fronts to conceal their involvement in secret operations.
Are you really telling me that the Q Team, despite having been pulled from these same government and military officials, lacks the expertise to create a site with anonymous ownership? That our digital soldiers have to rely on the expertise of Watkins for their security?
That's... a shockingly poor assessment of the Q Team's technological capabilities, even beyond what I would suggest.
All this talk of dates "coming and going" are BS. Just because something hasn't happened yet, doesn't mean it won't happen. I'm tired of people using that same failed argument of "none of Q's predictions come true." Which ones? Give me a few to reference.
The predictions are absolutely there, but they aren't falsifiable. Which is why nobody can directly disprove Q: "disinformation is necessary" pretty much means that anything you don't like from Q World, you can toss out as probably irrelevant.
And since deltas are apparently allowed to be considered valid, then Q can say, "midterms are safe", have that prediction fail, and then afterward say, "Oh, I was talking about 2022, not the 2018 election that was coming up when I made that prediction."
The fact is that if you accept a prediction on the basis that it will EVENTUALLY come true, without knowing anything about HOW or WHEN it will come true, or what specific events will prove that it's happening, then you're allowed to wait literally forever for the Plan and still never be proven wrong.
I can't prove that Jesus isn't coming back, but I'm betting that 2,000 years ago, the people who knew Jesus were probably not predicting it would take 2,000 years. But we'll keep waiting, since Jesus left his prediction open-ended, just like Q.
Which is why Q seems to me to require faith, and I don't really like faith in my research movements.
Do you know the phrase "Military is the only way?"
Actually, I already made this argument for you. :)
https://greatawakening.win/p/15IXpKkAgj/x/c/4OZqiNb1XPz
Why are the media choosing NOW to cover Q's return, when there have been previous "returns" from imposters since his absence?
I did answer your question, but I'll be clearer.
The media is watching you, not Q. They care about the Q community.
And due to the trip codes and such, the Q community is far more trusting of this particular variation of Q than previous returns.
The media is reporting on it because the Q people think it's news, and as this board has fondly said, you are the news now. What you think about Q's return IS news, and lots of people think he's returned. Which means lots of people think the Plan is about to kick off, which means the media is going to be interested in reporting on those people.
When I was a kid, I remember watching a doomsday cult on the news. They had sold their possessions, said goodbye to their family, and smugly told everyone else they were going to hell.
So of course the news cameras were rolling when the prophesized doomsday came and went. Everyone wanted to see the faces of the believers.
The cameras are pointed at you because the news wants to see your face when you're proven wrong, just as badly as everyone here wants to see me and people like me when I'm proven wrong.
What story did Q tell? Honestly, tell me what you think, because I have no idea what you think Q has said, so I cannot confirm or deny your stance's validity on the matter.
Most generally, Q not only supported Trump's allegations of a Deep State working specifically against him and his role in fighting them, but promised an inevitable victory. Most generally.
But at the end of the day, it doesn't really matter what I believe about Q's posts. It matters what the Q community does with those posts. Q never talked about COVID or the vaccine, despite these apparently being vital parts of the play. Q never really discussed biolabs in Ukraine being first hot war.
So why are people talking about these things here as if Q endorsed them?
Probably because if they ONLY stuck to the stuff Q talked about directly, then it would appear that the world quite moved on without Q. If Q never talked about COVID, then was he surprised by COVID? Was this not accounted for in the Plan?
I don't see a strong interest in exploring that theory here. But perhaps I'm wrong.