Posted on 01/25/2018 8:46:49 AM PST by MNDude
I thought you were saying that I refused to reveal how I had authenticated the Q posts. But I responded to that. Namely, if you really need me to explain how it’s done, then say so. It’s not a difficult process, as I’ve mentioned already.
In my reading of Q—which has been fairly extensive—I’ve seen many references to false flags. But it’s always been Q warning about false flags from others—not from himself. I don’t believe that Q has ever intimated that he himself is putting out false flags. He calls what he puts out crumbs, and encourages the collection and evaluation of them.
Go to https://qcodefag.github.io/index.html.
Use your browser's "search within a page" function for the string "disinformation" and ignore case. You ought to get 11 matches.
Then change the string to "disinformation is necessary".
There are 7 matches. Cut and paste an image of the entirety of each posting (including poster name, trip code if present, signature if necessary) which contains a match, into your reply.
Then explain to me one by one how you believe the phrase "disinformation is necessary" looks like it's talking about "false flags" -- including (since YOU used the word) -- the definition of "false flag".
Common parlance in the context of CBTS / The Storm / QAnon and related, is that a "false flag" is a crisis engendered by Deep State actors or their allies, in instill fear in the general public or to provide a pretext for the MSM to change the attention away from something positive for the President or from something which could lead normies (== non-red-pilled members of the public) to scratch their heads and go "Hey, wait...." and begin questioning key parts of the narrative.
That is, disinformation, is misleading posting, a feint, by Q; a false flag is an external world, "meat space" (not cyberspace) action by the Deep State and/or their agents.
The current discussion began re the incidents which had been forecast for Nov 3-4, 2017. It was suggested to me that Q’s description of the national mayhem (that the high profile arrests would precipitate), the Emergency Broadcast System implementation and the special ops, etc. were false flags. I.e.: false flags put out by Q himself. That’s not the indication I get from reading the posts I’ve cited, but that is the issue, at any rate.
Here is the original comment that precipitated the current discussion. The idea of false flags was introduced by this post, which I didn’t write:
‘one thing to add to the sauce about the 11-2 arrests and riots that appear to not have happened. One of the last lines mentions false flags.’
I want my mommy!!
Here is Q’s reference to false flags. It’s not from one of the three Q posts I had previously cited, but it’s definitely talking about the same events:
Nov 1 2017 22:56:38
Anonymous
ID: pGukiFmX
147567928
POTUS will be well insulated/protected on AF1 and abroad (specific locations classified) while these operations are conducted due to the nature of the entrenchment. It is time to take back our country and make America great again. Let us salute and pray for the brave men and women in uniform who will undertake this assignment to bring forth peace, unity, and return power to the people.
It is our hope that this message reaches enough people to make a meaningful impact. We cannot yet telegraph this message through normal methods for reasons I’m sure everyone here can understand. Follow the questions from the previous thread(s) and remain calm, the primary targets are within DC and remain at the top (on both sides). The spill over in the streets will be quickly shut down. Look for more false flags – stay alert, be vigilant, and above all, please pray.
OK, as soon as I’m done with her...
The old Q.....
quidam — like DITHF, “quidam” is a FReeper screen name. Quidam was noted for his unique posting style — one or two short, cryptic sentences, maybe a sentence fragment, and his posts were always signed twice. That is, not only did it appear automatically as it does on all replies, he also typed in his screen name to close each of his posts. Because of the nature of his posts and writing style, one could infer he was a knowledgeable, high-placed, anonymous Beltway insider. He spoke of such things as the dark and mysterious “men in suits” who would ultimately render a decision to Bill Clinton and remove him from office. Although ulimately discredited as an insider, his posts were among the most entertaining and memorable from the pre-impeachment era. He was a popular contributor and among the most well-known FReepers at the time. Unlike DITHF, Quidam occasionally still posts to FR, and he (or she?) is usually greeted with a wave of nostalgia. =) Quidam has been accused of being none other than Matt Drudge (just a rumor).
I kill you!!!
If you read Q's posts in detail, that some of his predictions are highly specific. (Hillary's arrest, Hillary's indictment, Podesta's plane being forced down; riots ensuing and National Guard called out to quell riots.
But here is where one has to be very careful interpreting things.
This is not "hand waving" but a critical distinction.
First as to the arrests. Particularly with a high-profile, politically connected figure such as Hillary Clinton, there is very unlikely to be a dramatic SWAT team raid, followed by handcuffs, and a public perp walk in cuffs to the police station. (Something similar was done to Manafort, but that was due to one of the lawyers on Mueller's team who has a long and established history of prosecutorial overreach, which has been discussed elsewhere: and Manafort actually is a flunky sent in to sabotage/spy on the Trump campaign, and not a major party's candidate for the Presidency.)
It is far more likely that she would be ushered in a rear entrance incognito *if* at all, or that almost everything would be handled behind the scenes by her lawyer, by mutual consent. (Think of how Rush Limbaugh was treated when accused of illicit use of painkillers).
In such a case, an ankle bracelet would be a discreet way -- along with flagging the passport) of securing her presence at trial. Which presents another interesting possibility which I will turn to later.
Concerning the riots.
Is God a liar, when he sent Jonah to proclaim, "Yet three days and Nineveh shall be destroyed" ?
Well, no. That was a *warning* of what *would* happen -- and they repented, putting on sackcloth and ashes, and so God relented.
Similarly -- the post about President Trump being protected on AF1 or somewhere else inaccessible, or the call up of the National Guard, etc., was a conditional: "Don't F with us."
For all we know, some very hasty phone calls went back and forth, arranging for Hillary to turn herself in secretly, and in return, for no riots. Even the US and the Soviet Union had a red phone.
Or, as I suggested earlier (remember the "Days of Rage" campaign briefly publicized for early November 2017 by the left?) -- the riots were set to go, except that Q's disinformation was designed to draw the left's attention away from the last place they expected -- Saudi Arabia and the overthrow of Prince Dopey (major shareholder in Twitter and Rupert Murdoch's companies to include one Fox News; owner of the top four floors of Mandalay Bay in Las Vegas, and from which there had been a mass shooting of US citizens.
When he was strung up by his heels, the funding for the riots was cut. Ever notice how quiet Antifirstamendment and the other organized lefty rent-a-mobs have been, lately?
Concerning the indictments of Hillary and Huma. Indictments need not involve the physical involvement of the accused: an indictment is the result of a prosecutor presenting evidence before a Grand Jury (only the prosecution is allowed to present), in order to convince the Grand Jury that there is enough evidence for a prima facie case against the accused, that a trial would have some reasonable expectation of a conviction. Although, to be fair, the old saw says that "you can indict a ham sandwich." And there are over 9000 sealed indictments nationwide, confirmed on a large number of boards; some sources today put the number at over 13,000.
I don't have time (I wish I did) to go over Q's writings in the depth they deserve. I tried to give the briefest hint in my post #105 this thread.
But there are a large number of individual posts where he comes right out and says things that would knock people's socks off. In two different posts on Nov. 1, one finds the lines
"Hahahaha, Trump has had MI infiltrate Antifa and all the dissenting local govts." (remember Jeff Sessions' recent subpoena of state and local governments concerning their compliance with Federal Laws about illegal aliens?)
and "Any person making statements they will not be seeking re-election was put in submission. For the betterment of the country not all will be prosecuted and all will do as told. You will see more of this occur (not normal yet disregarded) and even on the D side." This has come true in spades, yet has not been remarked upon.
Or from one of the first posts (Oct 29):"Follow Huma. Operation Mockingbird. Priority to clean out the bad actors to unite people behind the America First agenda. Many in our govt worship Satan. Not about Republicans v Democrats at this stage."
Why no outcry about that? (see also Spirit Cooking, btw, or elsewhere here on FR, the remarks of Jay-Z about Lucifer--implying such is known & practiced in certain rich & influential circles...it's not like he's a Goth Heavy Metal Rocker or anything, with that as part of his stage act.)
Or, just for kicks, read this excerpt from a post from Nov 1:
What was negotiated on the tarmac between BC and Lynch?
Remember it was expected HRC was going to win during this time period.
What if the wizards and warlocks tipped off a local reporter as to the supposed unscheduled stop?
What if the NSA under the personal direction from Adm R had this meeting miscat and logged under a false identity to prevent bad actors from locating while also verifying to said players all was clear _ no logs.
What really happened when the wizards and warlocks revealed what they had?
Was Comey forced into the spotlight shortly thereafter not by choice? Right before the election no doubt which would cast suspicion?
These are crumbs and you cannot imagine the full and complete picture.
If Trump failed, if we failed, and HRC assumed control, we as Patriots were prepared to do the unthinkable (this was leaked internally and kept the delegate recount scam and BO from declaring fraud).
Dig deeper - missing critical points to paint the full picture.
There is simply no other way than to use the military. It’s that corrupt and dirty.
Please be safe and pray for those in harms way as they continually protect and serve our great country.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
There's a LOT more going on, than you know about; including the CIA using overseas funding, which they believe(d) would be enough to allow them to challenge the Good Guys; the CIA using their own supercomputers ("The Seven Dwarves" -- and Q said their individual names were significant, too) to attempt to do brute force hacks of Q's tripcode; and a LOT more.
You said yourself earlier in this thread that
If the quote exists, post it. Saying a thing doesn’t make it true. Facts and evidence determine the truth in a case like this.
So why didn't you post what I suggested in my post #182? My browser is not letting me right-click-copy the images of posts from Q's page, and cut-and-pasting is taking me too long.
A clear distinction needs to be drawn between what is known and what can be imagined. What is known is based on facts and evidence. What can be imagined is based on A, how creative a person is, and B, how dedicated to a theory a person is.
Here is an example. According to Obama-friendly biographer and veteran investigator David Maraniss, Stanley Ann Dunham and the baby NEVER lived at the address listed on both the LFBC and the newspaper birth announcements. But there’s also no actual *evidence* that, in the months leading up to and the weeks immediately following the birth, she lived anywhere else in HI .
This leaves Obots in the lurch. They believe with all their hearts that Obama was born in HI. But even they realize that it would be fundamentally helpful to their narrative if they could identify *where* Stanley Ann was living at the time.
One of the Obots decided that SA actually *was* living at the address listed on the birth certificate. The reason Maraniss believed she wasn’t was because she was living there ***secretly.***
In support of this theory the Obot concocted a very elaborate narrative. The level of detail he went into was simply incredible. All his theory required was the concession that all his presuppositions were true, and it worked.
So what basic evidence underlay this protracted exercise of the imagination? Well it was none other than the *fact* that Obama was born in HI. That being the case, his mother *had* to be living somewhere. So, since the most likely place for her to be living was the address listed on the birth certificate, the Obot’s intricate theory was ***true.***
Q.E.D.
Of course the counter to all that is, what if Obama was NOT born in HI. Then the Obot’s exercise in circular reasoning crashes and burns.
The dynamic with Q runs along the same lines. It is possible to set out an elaborate set of assumptions and possibilities, and to conclude that, if every one is granted then, A, what Q said would happen actually *did* happen, or, B, that what Q said actually *prevented* certain events—which would have been the goal all along.
How can all that be known to be true? By granting the conclusion up front: if Q says it, it’s true. Once that conclusion is granted, then everything that follows can be construed as evidence supporting the conclusion. But it all hinges on stipulating the conclusion up front; that is the key.
What if someone doubts the conclusion or has questions about it? Then they are lying, dishonest trolls. Simple as that.
As JR himself said, we’d all love to believe Q. It just shouldn’t be construed as a crime that some of us have greater reservations than others.
+2.
As noted several posts prior, here is the specific comment I was addressing:
‘one thing to add to the sauce about the 11-2 arrests and riots that appear to not have happened. One of the last lines mentions false flags.’
The issue at hand was whether the Q posts I had cited may have contained false flags. Iow, the issue is very specific. I addressed it as such.
Here again is the Q quote in question. It speaks for itself.
Nov 1 2017 22:56:38
Anonymous
ID: pGukiFmX
147567928
POTUS will be well insulated/protected on AF1 and abroad (specific locations classified) while these operations are conducted due to the nature of the entrenchment. It is time to take back our country and make America great again. Let us salute and pray for the brave men and women in uniform who will undertake this assignment to bring forth peace, unity, and return power to the people.
It is our hope that this message reaches enough people to make a meaningful impact. We cannot yet telegraph this message through normal methods for reasons I’m sure everyone here can understand. Follow the questions from the previous thread(s) and remain calm, the primary targets are within DC and remain at the top (on both sides). The spill over in the streets will be quickly shut down. Look for more false flags – stay alert, be vigilant, and above all, please pray.
Thanks!
I quoted you chapter and verse on explicitly what to do, to find, and to share where in the Q postings, the word "disinformation" was used by Q.
Post 159, @JockoManning:
IIRC, Q-Anon himself/themselves have quietly noted at least once that they will, from time to time, seed untrue or partially true disinformation in his posts for strategic reasons with the evil doers reading his stuff. That's typical in such operations.
Post 160, @FantasyWriter replying:
Please post that quote. I already have the link.
Post 161, @JockoManning replying:
Nope.
Post 162, @Fantasywriter replying:
If the quote exists, post it. Saying a thing doesn’t make it true. Facts and evidence determine the truth in a case like this.
Post 175, myself jumping in:
You asked where Q had said disinformation was necessary -- strongly implying such claims were made up. I don't have time to do cut and paste; so I gave a count of occurrences of the two strings "disinformation" and "Disinormation si necessary" from https://qcodefag.github.io/index.html.
Post 181, @Fantasywriter replying to me:
In my reading of Q—which has been fairly extensive—I’ve seen many references to false flags. But it’s always been Q warning about false flags from others—not from himself. I don’t believe that Q has ever intimated that he himself is putting out false flags. He calls what he puts out crumbs, and encourages the collection and evaluation of them.
Post 182, myself replying to Post 181:
Do this:
Go to https://qcodefag.github.io/index.html.
Use your browser's "search within a page" function for the string "disinformation" and ignore case. You ought to get 11 matches.
Then change the string to "disinformation is necessary".
There are 7 matches. Cut and paste an image of the entirety of each posting (including poster name, trip code if present, signature if necessary) which contains a match, into your reply.
Then explain to me one by one how you believe the phrase "disinformation is necessary" looks like it's talking about "false flags" -- including (since YOU used the word) -- the definition of "false flag".
Common parlance in the context of CBTS / The Storm / QAnon and related, is that a "false flag" is a crisis engendered by Deep State actors or their allies, in instill fear in the general public or to provide a pretext for the MSM to change the attention away from something positive for the President or from something which could lead normies (== non-red-pilled members of the public) to scratch their heads and go "Hey, wait...." and begin questioning key parts of the narrative.
That is, disinformation, is misleading posting, a feint, by Q; a false flag is an external world, "meat space" (not cyberspace) action by the Deep State and/or their agents.
Post 183, Fantasywriter dodging and changing the terms of the debate:
The current discussion began re the incidents which had been forecast for Nov 3-4, 2017. It was suggested to me that Q’s description of the national mayhem (that the high profile arrests would precipitate), the Emergency Broadcast System implementation and the special ops, etc. were false flags. I.e.: false flags put out by Q himself. That’s not the indication I get from reading the posts I’ve cited, but that is the issue, at any rate.
This directly contradicts BOTH the suggestion of @JockoManning at post 159, AND my suggestion in Post 182 -- IMMEDIATELY PRECEEDING your reply.
You are openly wasting everyone's time, demanding explanations, and then ignoring them, continuing to disrupt the thread.
You are a liar and provocateur, and NOT posting in good faith.
The erroneous contention is YOURS. That is, if anything Q said did not come true immediately, Q is forever discredited as a LARP or worse, and must be ignored.
The reason you are lying was covered earlier, by multiple other posters (post 92) in addition to myself (posts 105, 192).
You continue doing all you can to stand on your head and hold your breath to focus attentions solely on a three posts of Q's (primarily focusing on one sentence from one of those posts), and ignoring ALL other thread content unless you can use it to attack the poster or twist it to support your original point.
Your post 194 said "The issue at hand was whether the Q posts I had cited may have contained false flags. Iow, the issue is very specific. I addressed it as such."
That is factually incorrect. @JockoManning said out loud in post 159:
IIRC, Q-Anon himself/themselves have quietly noted at least once that they will, from time to time, seed untrue or partially true disinformation in his posts for strategic reasons with the evil doers reading his stuff. That's typical in such operations.
and you said yourself in post 191:
In my reading of Q—which has been fairly extensive—I’ve seen many references to false flags. But it’s always been Q warning about false flags from others—not from himself. I don’t believe that Q has ever intimated that he himself is putting out false flags. He calls what he puts out crumbs, and encourages the collection and evaluation of them.
I have posted exactly how to find and post here, the other postings by Q, where he warns of disinformation by himself.
You falsely claim you have extensive reading of Q: and yet ignored my post 105 which contains more from Q than you have *ever* posted.
By saying these things, you are openly contradicting yourself now, liar.
All your nastiness does is discredit you. A person with the facts and truth on their side can afford to be civil.
And, these quotes show you deliberately ignored posts by others raising the very topics in question, AND addressing your assertions.
AND they contradict your claim to be "very well read" in Q.
Baldfaced liar.
For the lurkers: post #196, #197
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.