Kim Clement, if I recall right, said that the news media would in the end support Trump and promote him legitimately.
Thanks for posting this, friend. My post was an attempt to explain something and be helpful without having to do a lot of back research. The caveats I offer were because beyond the basics I haven't looked recently into the Q clock phenomenon. I am open to fraternal correction. I posted in passing so the disdain may have come off as heavy handed.
I couldn't remember how the Q clock started so thanks for reminding me.
The only disdain I have for the Q clock theory and Q research decodes is when people stretch meaning too far to find a connection or do weird numerology (like serialbrain2 did - I think that was the name).
So for future proves past and for legitimizing Q I think the Q clock is great. For datefagging or for trying to predict the future I think the Q clock now isn't as relevant outside of that initial establishment of "Can we trust Q? -> Holy Moly Q is legit". It is tool with uses but for some of us who were watching early on (I was within that first month or so) it helps us have few doubts about original Q. Current Q (June posts around Roe vs Wade) needs to be established again using Q deltas with Trump messages.
Since the game is information/disinformation and moves/countermoves I have my skepticism on the Q team using a model like the Q clock as a rigid and easily predictable tool. Sometimes it works when posts are for the anons or for stirring up deep state but other times posts are not for us and may never be explained.
So I do believe in the Q clock model but personally with the amount of years gone by I don't need it to legitimize Q. Newer anons might.
Now we are in a different phase. Since there aren't recent Q drops and a lot of unfulfilled Q posts (that lead to us datefagging on) as I think about it, based on what you wrote, I can see a good use for the model in proper datefagging (Hey, guys this future date is possible and interesting versus the it is this day guaranteed form of datefagging). Proper datefagging or deltas can be helpful for newer anons or for those who do deep digging.
As for me things are so real in the news and in geopolitics that we see happenings all the time. Maybe the best thing Q did for me is help me see beyond the lens of the media propaganda. Not that we don't need new Q posts now (I would love to feel the experience and hype of a fresh Q post again) but we are awake and trained by Q. We see the patterns and through the lies. Just as we feel and see happenings escalating so too does the deep state feel the heat. I don't know when things will happen but damn isn't it satisfying watching the deep state fail in their propaganda. Maybe that is where I am getting my new Q post dopamine hits from now.
I will try to explain, but not defend the clock theory. It will be a poor effort.
People like to find patterns and decodes. Unless you were following Q drops in live time, there is going to be info/significance missed when looking retrospectively.
Early on people noticed that certain posts lined up to other posts. (As far as I know the Q team didn't explicitly promote the clock idea). When there were fewer posts connections were easier to see.
In seeing these patterns someone created a model (a circle that keeps spiraling from the center) and doing this lines up dates where posts had things in common. Think of it like a q delta (yearly) but more frequent.
As the circle kept going around people would draw straight lines radiating out and noted commonalities. However I think there is a danger in confirmation bias (as there are many posts that don't line up according to Q clock model).
Part of following Q is finding patterns, q proofs, and datefagging and the Q clock is an example of trying to find meaning in the cryptic posts. I am sure some connections were missed by the anons and some faulty connections were formed. The clock is one tool among many ways people came up with to find the pattern to Q posts.
I find it interesting but at this point not helpful. As the Q clock was accepted early on, it just continued to grow as more posts dropped.
Back then it was cool. Now it doesn't seem of much help.
Q drops have information for anons and disinformation for the Deep state. Moves and countermoves.
I wouldn't be surprised if the "3 non-military" members on the Q team (or in the know) is disinformation. At times it seems like different people are in the know or at least see the situation from higher up. The limit of 3 provides cover and plausible deniability.
Trump has to be in the know. It seems like Scavino is in the know. Same with Patel. However I wouldn't be surprised if Scavino and Patel are small fish and directed as needed by a Q team in the shadows.
Washington Field Office (DC)
Roe vs Wade Outdated!
DNC Overrated!
Long have we waited!
Q Activated!
How about not at all. We are uhhh... not sure when babies are babies but it is okay to kill up to 12 week old babies in the womb because we aren't sure. If you and they don't know then how about not at all.
The reasonable mark is not at all. No abortions.
If you think 6-12 weeks is reasonable than you aren't any better than those who think a baby can be killed at 18 weeks or 24 weeks or during partial birth abortions.
I agree with you when you say it is murder, plain and simple.
(Forgive me if I completely am misreading your post but if you are in favor of 6-12 week abortions than disregard this apology).
I apologize if I came off harsh earlier. I responded right after I woke up and typed it up in a rush.
Thanks for finding and posting new sauce. I think if you shared more context and explained better where you were coming from people would be more receptive. I interpreted it as this is not a theory but read it and believe it which forces us to have to read it just to engage in a dialogue. Since I have to prioritize my time, you end up getting a superficial response from me and others. Maybe frame it as "I found this and not sure what I think of it so could we have an open discussion, as a group, with no agenda." People want to find truth and don't mind reading but it is in how you frame it.
Because everyone but you recognize in the scheme of things Scientology is a small group in comparison to others. In a post you should persuasively argue your point and present the facts. If people are interested they read follow your sources, etc.
You are arguing a point ands telling us your are correct because of your links. I don't think anyone disagrees that scientology and our government have connections. Where there is money there is corruption and control.
However in the scheme of things, I still would argue that Freemasonry and Fake Judaism are much larger fish to fry than what you posted. The way I view it is that there is a cabal that's organized and it reveals itself in many forms (high ranking Mormonism, freemasonry, scientology, CFR, etc.) Scientology is not a cause of the cabal or the illuminati but a form/offshoot of it.
Scientology is bad. Groups are more connected than we realize but I disagree with your premise.
Honestly part of me thinks you aren't being genuine. On the one hand you present a theory for discussion and you say you have no theory (as in you present a point for discussion according to a theory you do not personally hold) yet you react heavily when people reject the idea you post. That is a discussion. Don't ask us to do the heavy lifting, it is on you to post a discussion subject and summarize it to create interest.
If you want more engagement then next time provide more bread crumbs and create interest. There are plenty of theories out there and posts to ponder on GAW. Why should we care so much about yours when it completely flies in the face of the idea of the cabal or illuminati that most people believe to be true and is backed up by lots of sources.
Great strawman argument. What you said is not at all what he argued. Way to be a moron.
He is speaking about human blood.
Since Jews (the one who follow the ritualistic Old Testament laws) are forbade to drink blood (in general), the good Jews aren't going to partake in baby sacrifice, human torture, and consuming andrenochrome.
Christians and non-Jews are not bound by Leviticus. There are moral laws in the Old Testament that still apply to Christians but not ritual cleansing laws.
Some argue that there are fake Jews (aka non-Jews or secular bad Jews) that control much of the world and are in the same subset of people who offer sacrifices to Satan to get ahead and stay in power.
OP is actually defending authentic Judaism as valid, not attacking the Jews as you say.
Drinking human blood procures from sacrifice victims is immoral. The rest of the cabal is not off the hook. Leviticus explains why it is wrong from Jewish context. When viewed outside of a Jewish context, it doesn't mean it's okay for every one else to do it.
Read a logic book before posting again. You are either really dumb or a troll. Likely both.
@CatholicAnon
Here is my Q decode. Suicide weekend actually refers to all of us who die from alcohol poisoning from playing this game over said weekend.
A fart means the train is coming. CHOO CHOO!
Not necessarily. A quick search shows that he is receiving an award/being recognized in Taiwan due to his past role in government. It could hypothetically be a cover story and he is the Secretary of State but I don't believe this de facto confirms that he is.
Just finished watching the movie (in Midwest). For the 1 PM showing there were 89 tickets purchased. This was in a small city (20,000 population) surrounded by small towns and farms.