ARandomOgre 2 points ago +2 / -0

Sorry, I hit a busy patch at work. I’ve read through what you wrote and started on a response but never had the chance to finish. I will update when I’m able.

ARandomOgre -1 points ago +1 / -2

Yeah, I don't know either. I can see the threads there when I look at my history, but they don't seem to show up when I look at the thread directly. No big deal.

ARandomOgre 1 point ago +1 / -0

Hi Zeitreise,

Since you said you were inspired to write this after our conversation, I appreciate the time you took.

I think you feel that I do not understand the general premise of your beliefs. I feel like I do, at least in some sense.

What I'm having trouble doing is translating it into a practical translation of what we're seeing. I'm having trouble making specific, verifiable predictions, rather than generalized predictions. It feels more religious than anything. Which doesn't make it wrong, but makes it faith-based rather than empirical.

You suggest that your predictions (extrapolated from Q's) will come true, and I can accept that. But what I'm trying to do is translate what we actually see into how they fit into the generalized predictions of Q's eventual victory, specifically with the vaccines.

The original conversation we had asked this question, so I guess I'll ask again and see how we can apply what you wrote.

Let's assume the Plan is going cleanly, and Donald Trump always intended to "leave" office. This was always planned and things are going to plan.

Trump knows the Cabal is planning a "forever lockdown." He knows this will fail, because the Plan guarantees it. There is no possible way the Cabal will survive the next few years, according to the Plan.

If all that is true, what is the point of forcing the vaccine? What benefit does releasing the vaccine actually offer, if the Plan guaranteed the Cabal will fall anyway? The vaccine isn't just targeting the embedded Deep State agents, it's indiscriminate.

So why is the damage being done by the vaccine a necessary part of the Plan if the Cabal was already guaranteed to fall, and never could have enforced a forever lockdown anyway, because Trump was always destined to return? What part of your post explains that?

I just have a really hard time seeing how using a massacre disguised as a medication and endorsed by both sides of the mainstream political spectrum as trustworthy is considered a good guy plan, especially since the vast majority of deaths are innocent people that the good guys are supposed to be protecting. Including vaccinated children.

ARandomOgre 0 points ago +1 / -1

Not sure who "he" is referring to.

The meds the doctor is on? Very small chance of that.

The meds that the son is on? That's legally impossible for the doctor to avoid, and if that happens, raise legal hell, because you will win.

ARandomOgre 0 points ago +1 / -1

And unfortunately, something I've dealt with from personal experience, from doctors fucking up my own medications at one point that caused some serious reactions. I have kind of a hair trigger when it comes to paying attention to medication interactions, because doctors can screw that up on their own without our help.

ARandomOgre 1 point ago +2 / -1

I think that both Q people and I share an appreciation that the truth is not dependent on winning a popularity contest.

ARandomOgre 1 point ago +1 / -0

There's also the issue where ivermectin seems increase the binding potential of certain medications, such as benzodiazepines. This increases the potency of the medication beyond what would be expected for the dose administered.


Also, if the child is on painkillers (likely when intubated), most of those put strain on the liver. Liver damage and strain on liver can be largely interchangeable, because you don't want to put additional strain on a damaged liver or a liver already under strain. Doctors would need to know all medications affecting the liver to avoid accidentally damaging the liver as a result of additive liver effects.

ARandomOgre -2 points ago +4 / -6

I'm sorry you feel that way, but the spirit of this board is research. I am providing information based on my own research combined with yours. A researcher knows how to filter bad information through research. If you find my information to be invalid, you're welcome to either contest it or ignore it.

But I'd prefer not to get too far into that debate here in a thread where a parent is asking for help with their intubated child. I am trying to provide that help based on my own research and knowledge, just like everyone else.

And I don't think that most would agree that merely acknowledging that ivermectin is a medication that can interact with other medication is against the spirit of valid, empirical research and in defiance of the Q mission.

ARandomOgre -2 points ago +2 / -4

If the patient is being intubated, it's likely there is a lot more than remdesivir being administered. Especially for a child, there's a not-unlikely possibility the patient is being administered with benzodiazepines to help them relax or ca-channel blockers for blood pressure issues, and there are mechanisms by which ivermectin can potentially interact with those types of drugs.

ARandomOgre 0 points ago +8 / -8

Literally nothing I said here was non-factual. Ivermectin is a real medication, and it does things within the body. Even very safe medications can have interactions, which is why doctors ask you what you're taking. Surgeries can be postponed for things as simple as fish oil due to the increased chance of bleeding. You can't avoid problems with medication interactions that you don't know are in the patient.

If something goes wrong at the hospital and the doctors have the ability to blame the fact that their patient was secretly being administered a drug that they didn't know about, you don't think they'd jump on that to avoid liability? You trust that they'd ignore the fact out of the kindness of their heart?

I'm just trying to provide people with information that prevents accidental interactions from taking place. Whether or not you wish to use that information is entirely up to you.

ARandomOgre -39 points ago +9 / -48

Regardless of your thoughts on ivermectin, please consider very carefully before doing anything like this. Ivermectin is an active drug and can interact with other medications that the doctors may be giving people in the hospital.

Even if ivermectin is a 100% safe 100% guaranteed cure for COVID, it can be dangerous if it interacts with something else. The last thing you want is a bad reaction with a hospital medication because the doctors had no idea their patient was secretly taking ivermectin as well. They can't plan for interactions with medications they don't know the patient is taking.

Not only that, but if something goes wrong and they do a blood test and find out ivermectin was secretly being administered to their patient, then that can be legally problematic for whoever administered that drug.

Just be careful with this sort of thing. You can be 100% right that ivermectin is the right choice, but administering it secretly without telling the people who are also giving drugs to the patient is a very risky decision to make.

I am sorry to hear about your son, and I am truly wishing him the best.

ARandomOgre 2 points ago +2 / -0

You know, a lot of my friends who got into Q did so because Q supporters presented themselves as an anti-pedophile task force. That any child lost to these monsters was too much.

I find it hard to reconcile that version of Q I saw pop up on 8chan several years ago with the one that would allow innocent children to die by the millions in pain from a poison vaccine that Trump knows is poison, but is not even HINTING against getting. He's called it a "lifesaver." He's said he's proud of it.

I understand you believe that these are extraordinary measures and all, but slaughtering children by the millions in order to destabilize a pedophilic Cabal seems like a decision that not only is far more extreme than is required, but isn't a decision that should be made unilaterally.

You seem to have an unbelievable amount of faith in Q to assume that if this is the Plan, it's the best Plan that could be put forth. Because it's a Plan that kills tens of millions of innocent people and children, including from Patriot families, and if someone is deciding that's the only way to save the world, then that person needs far more credibility to deserve that amount of faith than Q could claim as a military intelligence officer or whatever the popular consensus is for the Q team's occupation.

ARandomOgre 1 point ago +1 / -0

You just said a minute ago that Trump forced the Cabal to reply their poison vaccine six years early.

If he forced them to deploy it early, then he forced them to deploy it. That means Donald Trump was responsible for it being deployed.

The only way that it can be forced on people by governors and businesses is if it exists. And it exists here because, according to you, Trump forced the Cabal to deploy it early.

And then set a sting for them? Using an apocalypse?

That still doesn’t feel like a good guy plan to me. That seems like the type of thing, in my deluded movie world, that you’d send in a Bruce Willis character to stop with two handguns and manly baldness.

Also, why do you think I got a saline solution, and what was the point of giving me saline? As a worthless feeder, I thought I was the target for depopulation in your theory. It can’t be a control group, because control variables are only useful if you collect data from them, and they never reached back out to me after my vaccine, which means no data, which means I’m not a control.

ARandomOgre 1 point ago +1 / -0

I see. So instead of shooting us in the streets, you are suggesting Donald Trump chose instead to use a chemical weapon hidden (perhaps by forcing the Black Hats to use theirs) in a vaccine against a pandemic he knew was fake, and then put his endorsement behind it.

And instead of shooting us in the streets, he’s more comfortable with these chemical weapons being injected into innocent people (including Patriots) and their children. The children that I thought Q was supposed to be protecting.

Am I misunderstanding some moral component to this Plan? Because I thought the White Hats were the ones opposing the depopulation agenda of the Cabal. I thought they were supposed to be saving the world from stuff like this.

ARandomOgre 2 points ago +2 / -0

So you’re suggesting that the vaccine was a poison deployed against the mindless sheep by the Cabal, which leaves only free-thinking Patriots as slave labor for the elite, correct?

And I’m guessing the “worthless feeder” comment implies that everyone who isn’t like you is so absolutely worthless that they’re not even worth keeping as slave labor, right? That only you would make viable slaves after the Great Reset?

So that would make the Cabal’s plan to kill off almost the entire world in which they are powerful and have an obedient, mindless workforce, and trade it for a postapocalyptic world in which their power is significantly reduced, and the only people they left alive were strong, warrior-types who were strong enough to resist taking the vaccine.

And then, after they have outnumbered themselves, removed their entire base of human power, and gathered a bunch of Badasses onto the opposite side of the battlefield from them, they then try to enslave you?

That’s their plan?

This is the same Cabal that has gripped every facet of the world in power since forever? That has plans and power structures so complex that most people don’t think they exist? That required a strategic genius, or maybe even future-seeing AI, to be smart enough to defeat them?

That Cabal’s plan is to kill their own army and supply lines, isolate the strongest and most Patriotic members of society into an opposing army, and then try to rebuild society with them?

That… doesn’t sound right to me. There’s got to be a part of this story that involves literally every member of the Cabal simultaneously suffering severe brain damage to think that killing everyone except the strongest rebels is somehow going to result in a better world for them.

I can’t accept a scenario that requires the enemy to be both extremely, impossibly strategic but also so fucking brain dead that their plan couldn’t even survive a cursory Looney Toons logic review by a random Redditor.

ARandomOgre 2 points ago +3 / -1

Not really, no.

Let’s make this practical.

Trump is sitting in the White House. He is aware and a part of the Plan. He knows what the steps are and that he is inevitably going to win. He then has to make a choice on Covid.

  1. He ignores it, and the Plan goes forward. He “leaves office” as planned. The Deep State imposes forever lockdowns. Trump comes back and hangs all the bad guys according to the Plan. He lifts lockdowns. Everyone is happy.

  2. He releases a poison vaccine on a civilian population while telling them it’s a “lifesaver” and that he is proud of it. Tens of millions of innocent people inject themselves and their children with it. People will inevitably die or will be crippled permanently. He then “leaves office” as Planned. The Deep State has no justification for lockdowns. Trump comes back and hangs all the Bad Guys according to the Plan. Everyone is sad and miserable because millions of people died and were crippled via a chemical weapon to avoid a lockdown that was already doomed according to the Plan anyway.

So… in very simple terms, for the slow people like me, why is option B considered better than option A, when the only difference is the use of chemical weapons against unsuspecting civilians by Donald Trump? Because the outcome is exactly the same, outside of all the death from the vaccine?

The only justification I could see is if the use of the poison vaccine is supposed to be part of the Plan to kill off Trump’s enemies, but using a chemical weapon against civilians and children based on alignment with your values doesn’t really seem like a White Hat plan and not something that Patriots would be supporting.

ARandomOgre 1 point ago +3 / -2

I want to extrapolate, because I've asked a few times and don't get many answers.

The common response is, "If Trump didn't release the vaccine, we would have been in lockdowns forever."


If NCSWIC, then no, we would NOT be in lockdowns forever. Because Trump is supposed to be on his way back soon, right? Isn't the Deep State supposed to be just about finished? Isn't the Plan supposed to result in the defeat of the Cabal, and nothing can stop what is coming?

The only way that we could be on lockdowns forever is if the Deep State remains in control. Forever.

Which means that Trump's plan to release the vaccine to counter these forever lockdowns was done apparently with the impression that the Deep State was not going to be defeated any time soon.

Because otherwise, the lockdowns would have ended when Trump took control of the country back and hung the Cabal. They can't enforce lockdowns if they're defeated, and the Plan is supposed to be defeating the Cabal.

So the vaccine wouldn't have been necessary, because Trump would have sent the Deep State to Gitmo anyway. Their plan to have lockdowns forever is utterly meaningless if Trump is guaranteed to return to power. The vaccine would also therefore be meaningless.

So if the vaccine is actually a poison, and Trump released it to stop a plan that he was going to stop anyway when he returned to power, then this vaccine either isn't causing the problems people think, or Trump himself never had faith he would return to power, and therefore released a dangerous vaccine to counter the Deep State's plans that he personally wouldn't be able to stop once he left office.

What part of the logic of the plan am I missing?

ARandomOgre -1 points ago +1 / -2

True, but a sulfite isn’t sulfur the same way that table salt isn’t chlorine gas. If you’re going to claim an allergy and then talk about being allergic to sulfur, they will know right away that you’re bullshitting them.

ARandomOgre 1 point ago +2 / -1

People are not allergic to sulfur. There is a lot of natural sulfur in our body.

You may be thinking of sulfa, which is a type of antibiotic to which many people have allergies. But sulfa isn’t connected to the vaccine, being a completely different type of drug.

ARandomOgre 7 points ago +7 / -0

The people obviously see something in you that you do not. So look for that.

If it doesn’t exist, then don’t take the job, because they have made a mistake about you.

If it does exist, then imagine whether it would make you happy serving the people in a role they want you to fill.

You like your solitude, but perhaps you could also like serving a community that apparently admires you. If not, don’t take it, but it’s worth considering whether or not there are different ways to be happy.

ARandomOgre 4 points ago +5 / -1

Have some self-esteem. It doesn’t take a financial incentive for people from the outside to be interested in talking with you guys. I wish I could get paid to talk with people I don’t always agree with, but no, I’m not being paid a thing.

view more: Next ›