2
Th4rd_R3ich 2 points ago +2 / -0

These people really bring out the anger in me when I hear how they treat people who did what we all were hoping someone would do.

3
Th4rd_R3ich 3 points ago +3 / -0

Every super villain has an achilles heel. And time after time, its pride.

10
Th4rd_R3ich 10 points ago +10 / -0

Operation Trust never exposed the own crimes against humanity their own government never wanted exposed.

2
Th4rd_R3ich 2 points ago +3 / -1

Ehh I don't know about that. There are some terrible fathers out there unworthy of interacting with their kids.

1
Th4rd_R3ich 1 point ago +1 / -0

Lol I will never blame you for coming off as aggressive or hostile even if you do. I've seen how often you get attacked lol. It's only natural to get defensive when everything you say is taken as a personal attack haha.

But alas I'll address your points above:

"Yes, but it’s an assumption you are still saying you largely agree with. The Q team are the good guys. Perhaps you personally are willing to entertain doubts, but are you suggesting this board puts a lot of research effort into proving those doubts, as hard as they try to prove false flags?"

I understand the point your making and it's a valid one. I definitely find myself super critical of people here when they exhibit confirmation bias which is absolutely prevelant on this board.

However, I've definitely also seen a good deal of skepticism on this board from many (although a minority) and they are a big factor that piqued my intetest and brought me over from patriots.win

The ability to remain skeptical and discerning while also acknowledging that conspiracies have always occurred throughout history, in my opinion, make for some of the most substantive discussions on this particular board.

"Doesn’t this typically just get dismissed as 'dooming'?"

If it does, it absolutely shouldn't get dismissed as dooming and ill do my part to call out anyone who tries to shut down reasonable criticism.

"Can I ask the basis of this belief? I have met more than enough violent and unstable people in my life that I don’t find it hard to account for school shootings in the 300,000,000 million people that live in this country (this country being the USA). Is it a general doubt, or have you sustained it through examination of these specific shootings?"

Ah I see this is where you and I reach a point of divergent styles of rationalization. I too have met plenty of violent, unhinged people and growing up in the ghetto, you were routinely victimized if you behaved passively and avoided violent altercations.

But I've also met at least two genuine narcissistic sociopaths. And most people have not. And if they have, they usually are completely oblivious to the nature of these people, since they're almost always charismatic and sociable people and blend in almost perfectly into society.

I strongly believe this is one of the biggest variables that separates those who are able to see that conspiracies amongst the highest levels of government and bureaucratic power structures exist, and those who hold onto the belief that the level of coordination would be impossible to achieve and that our sociopolitical power structures are benevolent and that "we shouldn't attribute to malice what can be attributed to incompetence", as the saying goes.

How this ties into my conception that false flag shootings have definitely existed, is fairly straight forward. I've had first hand experiences with narcissistic sociopaths, two of them were the parents of a friend and held positions of great power, influence and wealth.

One of them was a friend I knew directly. And ALL of them were able to lie reflexively, speak eloquently, behave charismatically, effectively manipulate others into doing their bidding, and will gaslight their victims when they inevitably catch onto their self-serving behaviors.

To brush this off as mere anecdotal and insignificant would be naive. If those two parents were able to build such power and wealth for themselves and their families and get away with their crimes for decades, it is very likely that they werent the only sociopaths who seemed to prosper in a society where it pays to be self serving and ruthless. It is my conviction that there are undoubtedly many more just like them.

Their ability to prosper however, in both cases, ended up being temporary, as one of the parents committed suicide after he could no longer throw off the trail of Federal agents & the Texas court systems as they uncovered he had scammed 50,000 people for several million dollars. And the second parents' son ended up dying of a heroin problem he couldn't overcome after dealing with the lifelong trauma of being exploited for sexual favors as a child.

"Remember that when you’re talking to a non-Q person, you don’t have to play as coy. There is a reason that there are almost no Q supporters who are liberals. Because the world that Q says Trump is protecting, and the one that Q seems to care about, is that one that prioritizes conservative values."

What I meant by asking "what is the Q narrative", is "which singular Q belief are you proposing is the quote unquote "q narrative"?

Because what I see on these boards are that there isn't one narrative but a wide array of speculative assertions sometimes based on research and data compiling and other times based on preexisting beliefs, confirmation bias and emotions. And proper research requires the ability to realize we are all susceptible to confirmation bias and dissonance and thus requires individuals like myself and others who will steer blind believers back towards ensuring to question everything.

Also the second half of that paragraph I feel is an unfair assertion. Many many Trump supporters, like myself, were former liberals and Democrat voters as well. I thought of myself as a liberal for all of my adult life, especially after going through the liberal system of Academia in college where you are continuously bombarded with the subconscious idea that God & religion are obsolete, scientific authority is of highest regard, morally is relative to the individual and that truth is subjective.

That system is intentionally set up as to condition those younger generations pursuing higher learning to believe that everything we are taught there and the belief systems that are popularized there, are ones that only the most sophisticated and intellectual of individuals will be able to understand. And you will receive the most "pats on the back", when you demonstrate internalizing these liberal belief systems.

However, just as I previously emphasized the importance of having actors within communities to steer individuals towards questioning their own belief systems, I myself was steered towards questioning all my previously held leftist views and was shown the folly of believing that huge mainstream networks could never be intentionally deceptive and controlling of the masses.

So when you say "the world Q supporters believe that Trump is protecting, is one that prioritizes conservative values", I understand why you would say that. And it's a perfectly reasonable position to have when you are led to believe that morality is relative and truth is subjective.

However, we all live in one plane of reality, friend. Many of the differences in political views between left and right can be attributed to a difference in how each side perceives this one reality.

But therein lies the problem that our so-called leaders so frequently take advantage of. Regardless of how a person "perceives" reality, the consequences of a particular action will always be impervious to the emotional state of those observing the action.

A prime example would be the current debate over "gender affirming care" in adolescent children. The left thrives on utilizing manipulative linguistics in order to make an idea sound sophisticated, only understood by "intellectual superiors", and those ideas are often most strongly supported by those with prestigious academic credentials who advertise them as "revolutionary", ideas.

Regardless of a person's emotional response to this idea, or their conviction that its the morally sound path to lead a child down, it is still quantifiably involves the exact same conditioning processes used in grooming.

It still involves taking an preadolescent child with a still developing brain, and coercing them to make permanent, irreversible medical decisions (with many long-term side effects which aren't completely understood) as a solution to the same developmental stresses that often plague every normally developing child as they struggle to adapt and grow within an often unfair and difficult world to traverse through.

Additionally, many of these children who transition at a young age end up growing up to regret their decision and opt to detransition. Yet, these individuals are frequently shamed and criticized by the very community that claims to support them, and never receive nearly as much publicity in the media as those who promote transitioning as "righteous", and portray it as a positive solution.

Even further, it's evidenced by the staggering rate of suicide in individuals POST TRANSITION, that this process does not even closely yield the amount of positive results that are so frequently advertised by advocates of transitioning. Even still, advocates will cry and scream that this is because transgender people are so frequently shamed, discriminated against and marginalized.

However, these objections are once again just meaningless, emotional conjecture, since non binary people are so frequently spotlighted and idolized in the media and often provided with career opportunities over regular people, all in the name of inclusivity and diversity. They are practically a protected class, and people like Dave Chapelle and Ricky Gervais have been widely criticized and scorned by not just LGBTQ advocates but anyone on the left as well, just because they made jokes about them 🙄

One cannot both be marginalized AND also protected from criticism and provided additional resources by the establishment and corporate institutions. These two conditions are mutually exclusive by design.

But I digress... ultimately, although at first glance, it might appear that the world Q supporters advocate for is one that prioritizes conservative values, it is necessary to "zoom out", to more accurately view the full picture.

It's not so much about conservative values, for many of us on the right differentiate on a few policies such as gay marriage, taxation, immigration, etc... but it's more so about advocating for a world that acknowledges the many objective truths that today are unfortunately obscured from view and warped in order to pander to peoples feelings and self-serving beliefs.

Truth is more important than the GOP. Truth is more important than anything Q claims. Truth is more important than even Donald Trump.

Fighting for these objective truths to be observable by all is the only way we can ameliorate the schism between the right and the left. And our ruling class and many elected politicians are completely aware of this.

So they will expend as much time and resources as necessary to ensure that both sides will continue perceiving different versions of what we think is true. This is exactly how I know conspiracies exist.

2
Th4rd_R3ich 2 points ago +2 / -0

"You absolutely believe that Q is making theatrical moves like “optics.” You just don’t believe he’d use those tactics in such an evil way."

This is an assumption ogre. I'm personally of the opinion that Q team is benevolent, but I'm entirely open to the possibility that it's a trap designed to ensnare well meaning patriots.

"You assume every story that makes conservatives or conservatives values look bad in the media is a performance or false flag."

Not every story in general, but yes definitely the ones that are skewed in such a way to push tighter gun control. I'm sure some are natural events free from federal agent intervention, but many of them are not.

"So, for a moment, can you analyze this situation as if Q might also be using false flag attacks in order advance the Q narrative? Is there a reason that you don’t beyond faith that Q is the good guy?"

What on earth is the "Q narrative"? And how would false flags be used to advance it? This is a strangely thought out proposition so I would ask you to elaborate on the specifics of such a thing.

Lastly I'll reiterate, it's entirely possible that Q (person or persons) had negative intentions. Same with Donald Trump. I trust no man but Jesus christ.

1
Th4rd_R3ich 1 point ago +1 / -0

I would be inclined to agree. This was 20 minutes away from me. Wild.

5
Th4rd_R3ich 5 points ago +5 / -0

Lmao to be fair, I think Ogre is being genuine here. I've seen Zetriese fly in on a parachute to rebuke Reddit ogre on numerous occasions.

I've never seen such hatred lmao.

9
Th4rd_R3ich 9 points ago +9 / -0

Zetriese is right on this one ogre. Conservatives don't have any institutional power. I understand you're trying to play "Devils advocate", here but in no way shape or form is the establishment interested in spreading conservative, pro gun values across the cultural sphere.

This is a silly question, akin to asking, "why do you guys get suspicious at Black Lives Matter for buying themselves multiple million dollar homes, but not get suspicious at those few KKK members who bought themselves million dollar homes?"

It all comes down to the institutional power and desired outflow of narratives. We will not be gaslighted.

2
Th4rd_R3ich 2 points ago +2 / -0

Haha to be fair he's really good at breaking down the bias and manipulative framing devices used in the mainstream media.

That being said, he's a huge pussy, so afraid of criticism from left that he dismisses anything he's afraid of being remotely conspiratorial. Also he's super afraid of being wrong.

3
Th4rd_R3ich 3 points ago +3 / -0

You're absolutely right. I'll never forget all the times I had people taking LSD with me and going along with every idea or notion I brought to mind without remotely beginning to question what I was telling them.

I remember thinking, "This is dangerous. I could literally convince this guy we're being attacked by aliens and he had to attack innocent people who were trying to kill him and if I was convincing enough, he'd probably fucking believe it".

Thankfully I'm a pretty great person.

6
Th4rd_R3ich 6 points ago +6 / -0

That's likely what happened at Sandy hook but make no mistake, sometimes these false flags are easier to pull off if they actually let kids get killed.

1
Th4rd_R3ich 1 point ago +1 / -0

That email is non existent on the Wikileaks official database. And fact checkers insist that email was never actually real.

This is why I don't trust a Wikileaks running while Assange is in prison. Reeks of controlled opposition.

1
Th4rd_R3ich 1 point ago +1 / -0

Yes that would be the most likely case.

2
Th4rd_R3ich 2 points ago +2 / -0

We can get them from the cartel surplus store down here at discount. Since even during the Trump administration we've had really lax border security here.

I used to know some Mexican mafia goons who could get me a frickin RPG if I was so inclined.

5
Th4rd_R3ich 5 points ago +5 / -0

"So if this sheriff both saw this unreleased movie and was disturbed enough by it to immediately open an investigation thanks to D’Souza’s hard work, why is he also publicly denying it?"

Occam's razor would suggest he's feigning ignorance and or reliance on D'Souza's claims whilst knowing that it would ruin his credibility to acknowledge his investigation being connected in anyway with Dinesh's work.

The media would definitely have a field day if he acknowledged at all being connected to 2000 mules. It would also likely hurt his case.

3
Th4rd_R3ich 3 points ago +3 / -0

Many of the stories are told symbolically and with metaphor. God would not instruct the writers to create the stories in such literal and thus easy to convolute and distort over time. In my view the only way to ensure the crux of these stories stood the test of time was to ensure the stories were written in metaphor and symbolism.

Just my take.

view more: Next ›