To point out that someone (who is apparently helping you) might be tyrannical is counterproductive drivel.
It serves absolutely no purpose, other than to mark yourself as an abject waste of time to cater to your political ideas, their effort being completely wasted because you don't appreciate their help as you fictionalize things they potentially may do in the future.
Even if the fiction you imagined is true, it will serve you no purpose to complain about it until he actually proposes the wacky things you've imagined. Nobody is going to pat your back and say "good job" that you warned them 10 years early when chips are forced to be inserted into babies.
People are already fighting social scores and government monitoring today, and they're winning as will be evident when Trump wins in a landslide.
there's nothing we can do to sabotage or stop it
That's some strong fiction, thinking the American populace will accept a chip being implanted into babies with nothing they can do to stop it.
Voting is completely 100% rigged and has been for decades. Blaming voters for not participating in a rigged system is blaming the victim.
Voters did their jobs, Trump won in 2020. America has a suicide level of allowing corrupt politicians to escape the gallows.
They should have announced this about 1 week before voting started.
Make the democrats sort through all their forged pre-filled votes to see which will pass and which won't.
Real take from the woman.
Fake from the man trying to put the Harris sign in the yard. Certainly "you don't support tampons in men's bathrooms?" isn't at the top of their platform.
If the guy was serious he'd be talking about hating Trump.
Democrat riots serve democrat purposes.
I fail to see why anyone would assume that democrats are going to riot against themselves. What am I missing?
I keep getting stuck on the (seeming) fact that actual bullets were flying around and that four people were shot: Trump and three in the audience, one of whom died.
Imagine for a moment the following hypothetical:
- Trump is not actually shot. There is a blood squib that activates when he touches his ear.
- The scenario where Trump twisted his head to look at the white board, evading the lethal blow, could have been initiated by Trump because he knew when he would twist his own head.
- Q does the same thing the cabal is guilty of with their psyops, using crisis actors and fake deaths.
- Assume the Trump shooter wasn't actually killed. The firefighter in the crowd wasn't actually killed.
- Every supposed death was actually a crisis actor given a new identity, such as they would get if they were in witness protection
In a hypothetical with the above assumptions, I see no moral dilemma.
The above hypotheticals are the only way I would believe it is a psyop. I don't think Q or Trump would develop a plan knowing individuals were going to die.
It's difficult to believe either way ... hard to believe it is a psyop, and hard to believe Q was completely incompetent that day.
You hypothesize that I'm presenting a false dichotomy.
I hypothesize that I'm not.
The information necessary to distinguish who is correct or incorrect will never be public, so you have no more standing to claim it's a false dichotomy than I have to insist that it is a proper dichotomy.
But I'm not insisting. I'm merely presenting a hypothesis.
but I don't see any way to prove the issue one way or another
That's the way it is with everything that is Q-related. Nothing is provable. No one gets to insist any fact as indisputable. It's 100% about Socratic method, educated guesses and hypothesis.
The Socratic method in this particular instance ...
Does Q understand it is up against a centuries-entrenched cabal? Yes.
Does Q understand it is up against a cabal with trillions of dollars at its disposal? Yes.
Does Q understand that MK Ultra is a thing? Yes.
Does Q understand that assassination attempts against Trump would be inevitable? Yes.
Does Q understand the sheer magnitude of resources at the cabal's disposal virtually guarantee that Trump would be assassinated if his security wasn't overseen by military intelligence at all times? Yes.
With all that is at stake, would Q trust Trump's safety strictly to a hostile Biden administration? No.
Taking everything above into consideration, would Q allow the scenario unfold as we were explained? The one where
- shooter was filmed by many members of the public, many of whom directly reported to police/security
- shooter was known to be an issue by SS/police for over 20 minutes prior to shooting
- SS allowed Trump on stage even when the situation of the shooter was known
The answer to that is "No".
It's not even about whether they can "control every damn thing everywhere". It's about the sheer magnitude of the lapse in security that was reported. The lapse as reported could not exist if Q is real.
My hypothesis is that Trump and Q have already won the battle before it started by nailing the top of the cabal from the beginning, hijacking their chain of command, taking control of their operations and working out how the tens of thousands of cabal middlemen operatives will be punished while commanding them to self-immolate.
It is impossible to claim this hypothesis is false with publicly available knowledge. It's also impossible to insist that it's true. I'm not trying to insist that its true, I'm presenting it as a plausible hypothesis of the situation, and with all the data I see available I consider it to be the most plausible scenario.
Assume, like I do, that Q is real.
I'm not a fan of massive leaps of logic when it comes to Q proofs. For starters, we're YEARS beyond needing proofs.
Only using time as a basis for assuming a Q proof has happened is flawed. Certainly, every time stamp on Trump's posts doesn't directly correspond to a Q post.
Based on nothing other than 1717, this supposed decode suggests that Q is directly telling anons that assassination attempts are just for optics.
Even if that is true, what is the upside of notifying anons of this? (there is none)
What is the potential downside? What happens if it becomes common knowledge that Trump's assassination attempts are fake?
Zero upside for us to argue that point, and zero upside for Q to even hint at it. Whatever benefits gained by planning such a thing would be lost with broadcasting that it's fake.
no biblical passage teaches that Scripture is the formal authority or rule of faith in isolation from the Church and Tradition
No biblical passage teaches that Church tradition is to be valued. But the bible does say that
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness
But it doesn't say that Church tradition is profitable. In fact, Jesus doesn't speak favorably of tradition, such as Mark 7:8-9
For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do. And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.
and
Then came to Jesus scribes and Pharisees, which were of Jerusalem, saying, Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they wash not their hands when they eat bread. But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?
There are literally dozens of examples of Jesus dissing tradition, yet not a single time is tradition mentioned favorably in the Bible.
Aside from
Keep away from any brother who is living in idleness and not in accord with the tradition that you received from us
The key there is "that you received from us". That came from Paul. All of Paul's "traditions" are canonical scripture.
Catholic traditions mean nothing to me because many are contradictory of the Bible. Purgatory, praying to saints and Mary instead of God, indulgences, etc.
Just to highlight the idiocy of it, you have the 50 hail Marys that are taught that Catholics should include in their prayers. There are about 1.4 billion Catholics in the world. If every Catholic were to pray 50 hail Marys only once each day, that's 7000000000 prayers each day that Mary would be expected to heed. There are 86400 seconds in a day.
That means Mary would be tending to 4.86 million prayers per minute, 81,000 prayers per second. Catholics literally ascribe omnipotence to Mary, and nothing can be found in the 66 canonical books to suggest anyone but God could do that.
My arguments referenced actual scripture. If you have some counter-point to debunk my points, I'd expect it to come from the only material we both agree is legitimate, the 66 canonical books of the Bible.
This is the truth: If Trump's security was compromised, then Q isn't real.
I absolutely refuse to believe that there is a plan to save the world, orchestrated with military precision over the span of over 8+ years that can be foiled by a few incompetent DEI hires in SS supposedly supplied by the Biden administration.
More than half the people here still think Trump is either currently POTUS or in a protected status during a process of devolution until he's reinstated.
The belief that Q is real and the belief that Trump's current security is at the whim of a Biden-controlled administration are incompatible. Pick one or the other, they can't both be true.
Q of course is real. We're watching a movie. What makes for a good movie? Exactly what happened, as it happened.
Imagine if that operation produced millions of ballots for Joe, then had to redo millions of ballots for Kamala, and then will have to redo millions for Big Mike.
Swapping the democrat nominee might be a whitehat operation to throw off the democrat cheat machine.
"unbroken line of disciples"
This is what Jesus actually says:
Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed; And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.
According to John 8:31-32, all Christians are disciples.
If you actually meant "apostles", Acts 1:22 explains what an apostle was, that there was only 12 of them, minus one who needed to be replaced.
Beginning from the baptism of John, unto that same day that he was taken up from us, must one be ordained to be a witness with us of his resurrection.
The rules of being an apostle were laid out to be
-
with the 11 apostles from the time John was baptizing until the time Jesus ascended to heaven on the Mt. of Olives
-
actually witnessed the resurrection
No Catholic popes were apostles by that definition, and regardless of the catholic gross misinterpretation of Matthew 16:18, Peter was not the first pope.
Vigano is protesting the catholic church, and by catholic church definition Vigano is no longer a catholic because he was excommunicated. He is a protestant.
I agree.
To add to that, Jesus Christ said there were at least 7 completely independent churches in the book of Revelation, of which 5 were scolded for wrongdoing and threatening them that if they didn't get their shit together, their church would be taken from them.
And also in Mark 9:38:
And John answered him, saying, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name, and he followeth not us: and we forbad him, because he followeth not us. But Jesus said, Forbid him not: for there is no man which shall do a miracle in my name, that can lightly speak evil of me. For he that is not against us is on our part. 41For whosoever shall give you a cup of water to drink in my name, because ye belong to Christ, verily I say unto you, he shall not lose his reward.
John the apostle said "hey these guys over there are starting their own church can we stop them?" and Jesus said "no".
There is no "true pope". There's no call in the Bible for a "pope" to exist.
The notion that Catholics have abducted Peter into role of "pope" and thinking they developed pedigreed lineage of flawless, sinless popes that weren't at all flawed until the advent of social media, and hold the patent on Christianity to the exclusion of all who protest (i.e. protestants), is ridiculous.
This comment is not directed towards CMAnon. It's more directed at people who place Vigano on a pedestal because he has taken baby steps towards protesting the Catholic church and therefore became a better Catholic, instead of a better Protestant.
From my observation, it's akin to Bill Maher scolding leftists for being too wacky, or Ana Kasparian of the Young Turks scolding her fellow communists for looting too many stores.
every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is. If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.
Corinthians 3:13-15
If you become saved through John 3:16 (believe on Christ), but live a crappy life, the result is your rewards in heaven are diminished.
But you still make it to heaven.
but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire
Q predicted his death exactly 1 month prior by saying that he'd be "in the news".
1 month later, to the exact minute, he was pronounced dead.
It even took into consideration daylight savings time.
It was the most impressively accurate Q proof I can think of.
The purpose of HOAs was supposed to be to raise property values for the homeowners.
The irony is that many people (including myself) would never buy a home connected to an HOA.
If the church is perfect, then why did Christ scold 5 of the 7 churches in Revelation?
Biden appearing dead and resuscitating is a regular recurring event.
And Biden leaving the race has been predicted by most right along.
In other words, I don't think people are getting bogged down into whether Biden is having more severe health issues or the circumstances of him pulling from the race ... all that has been baked in the cake for years.
When I said
The firefighter and his family deserve honor and reverence for what they have suffered. Anyone who denies this comes off as unhinged
My context was that any democrat who denies that the firefighter and his family deserve honor would come off as unhinged.
Specifically, Destiny and all the unhinged democrats on social media commenting that it was a set-up came to mind.
such a castigation suggests that we should not be entertaining these ideas because it neglects the "deserved respect".
It is devastating to the left, and counter-productive for Q followers, to entertain that the shooting was staged.
If this hypothetical became common knowledge, it would negate Trump's 10-point spike which could add a couple more swing states and create an even larger landslide.
But I'm ok with talking about it because I don't think most people would agree with me and I won't convince enough people to have that happen.
In my mind, Q would never let Trump be in a situation with that lax of security. Q would never allow Trump to have a SS detail provided and managed by the Biden administration. With that understanding, this being a Q psyop is the only thing that makes sense to me.
Again, I apologize.
All is good, thanks for the reply!
I literally have no idea what you're even talking about.
You probably either misread a comment I made or are replying to someone else.
Anyone who tries to silence opinions or beliefs that differ from their own by appeals to emotion and "moral superiority" are either glowies or still completely stuck in the matrix.
Pure irony.
Posting what you consider to be a morally superior opinion and attempting to brow-beat me into silence for projecting that I'm doing exactly what you're doing.
Scott Adams was a vaxtard so there you go.
That Justin Trudeau article is posed as a question, as in "will he step down?" ... of course he won't. Very deceptive click-bait.