-@TH3WH17ERABB17-Q- Questions. White House Insider's postings- PART -sIx-

a reply to: AnkhMorpork

all of "Q" posts come down to an essence of light over dark, good vs. evil, freewill vs. morality, straight dealing vs. corruption and its biblical in scope and dimension. Since "Q" and Trump started its had an effect of making me go back and read that which was earlier not understood.

Many can come on here an post what they call questioning or conspiratorially derogatory posts against the "Q" movement never knowing they were deprived of the "light"

originally posted by: Enderdog
Might want to read Frank Baum...some pretty dark #...

i totally have, actually. no question some of it is strange, but this was also back when children's lit was not so much a thing.

I love the double meanings in the Q posts.

Yesterday got one that was pretty short, and we all went round and round with it.

Q !xowAT4Z3VQ ID: 2b9f10 1244154
Emmy awards.
Red carpet event?
Q

Tonight I came acorss an article at dailymail.uk...about the daytime emmys.

Loretta Swit, 80, looks impossibly glamorous as she reunites with M*A*S*H co-star Jamie Farr at Daytime Emmys

And then one line from the story caught my eye regarding Jamie Farr.

M*A*S*H ran for 11 seasons from 1972 to 1983 and Farr, now 83, played the cross-dressing corporal Maxwell Q Klinger.

And there it is, an Emmy event, with Q on the Red Carpet, next to the one giving the award.

I love synchronicity.

I read a lot of these q posts and am interested in them. I dont have much to say because its not my forte; there is more of a bigger picture type mentality that comes with these post than what I usually feel comfortable in contibuting to.

But I wanted to ask a question light of the netanyahu release today of the irans weapons program and the US intel confirming this.

Now please dont take this as an attack on anyone here; I am merely asking a question.

It seems to me that there is a danger of having too much faith in Q.

I know that there is a lot of evidence of things q has said that seems to have been accurate, though admittedly I am by nio means an expert.

However, how would you truly know if you are being fed a 95% truth to encourage your faith on something that is not good.

So for example, with me, I didnt buy the trump strikes on syria because I didnt see any proof assad was guilty.

Now i know that people have said that someone this was still in line with q through various methods.

But lets say we end up bombing Iran based off of netanyahus speech today and the US intel community confirming his speech was accurate.

I am sorry but I have seen too many wars we have been lied in to to give anyone, even trump, the benefit of the cdoubt to launch bombs before they show confirmable evidence in the public there is a good reason for it.

So my question is, will people demand to see tangible evidence before they cheer for a war, or would q's word be enough for people?

again not attacking anyone, just asking an honest question.

Its not only NK that is seeing the Light.

Saudi Arabia to ban Muslim Brotherhood from Schools.

a reply to: Grambler

Q keeps saying "They want war". My understanding is that Trump/Q are trying to avoid war. So done in NK and with ISIS for example. The idea is to cut off the funding of Cabal-backed Iranian leadership. From what Ive seen from Q so far, I fully expect Iran to mysteriously go peaceful in the next months, just like NK did.

That said, I pointed out earlier in thread that Trumps father was close to Netanyahu, so there might be something going on in those regards.

Sorry I couldnt answer your question fully, but the general Q-attitude is that THEY want war, we dont.

a reply to: Grambler

Think NK. Think Iran deal. Pressure, tension, release from tension (but without having a war). Peace through strength.

a reply to: Grambler

So my question is, will people demand to see tangible evidence before they cheer for a war, or would q's word be enough for people?

For me, personally, Q's word would not be enough.

But that fits with most of what Q has said. If you follow the posts, most of them are pointers giving a direction or place to look for answers, and questions that challenge conventional thinking. Q forces me, us, them, to go out and find the information, colllaborate, and try and draw reasonable conclusions from readily available information.

With respect to tangible evidence. That's a little harder. I guess the question that really matters is do you trust the source? Can the source be sourced? And i'll continue to say, twitter is not a source. Lot's of smart people, but light in the credibility area. For me the answer would have to be a lot more solid than the crapola speech Trump gave when he addressed the nation during the last Syria strike.

For me personally, after seeing the Iraq mess, I set a very high bar for going to war and lending my support.

I default to the infinite wisdom of George W Bush, "Fool me once shame on you, Fool me twice...Potato."

a reply to: CoramDeo

I know I pinkie swore but I just have to say that this was announced almost a week ago:
Presenters for 45th Annual Daytime Emmy Awards Announced

The line-up of presenters for the Sunday, April 29 show include, Marie & David Osmond, Jane Pauley (CBS Sunday Morning), Loretta Swit and Jamie Farr...

originally posted by: AnkhMorpork

I don't know, call it prophecy, timeline manipulation, an inevitability, doesn't much matter because we're right in the thick of it now.
PEACE and PROSPERITY and LOVE will just happen of their own accord as a new type of dynamic, of positive reinforcement and a self-fulfilling prophecy. Predictive programming at it's very best and not as a point of manipulation or coercion for selfish gain. They know what they are doing, and why.

Doesn't it boil down to a battle between Good AI and Bad AI?

Whichever side masters the AI Singularity will win.

Sort of like a Vedic text, but with more rainbows.

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: CoramDeo

I know I pinkie swore but I just have to say that this was announced almost a week ago:
Presenters for 45th Annual Daytime Emmy Awards Announced

he line-up of presenters for the Sunday, April 29 show include, Marie & David Osmond, Jane Pauley (CBS Sunday Morning), Loretta Swit and Jamie Farr...

It's still fun.

BTW, I never invited you to leave.

Edit: Maybe that came out wrong. I meant, since your still here, might as well speak your mind.

originally posted by: Skyfloating
a reply to: Grambler

Q keeps saying "They want war". My understanding is that Trump/Q are trying to avoid war. So done in NK and with ISIS for example. The idea is to cut off the funding of Cabal-backed Iranian leadership. From what Ive seen from Q so far, I fully expect Iran to mysteriously go peaceful in the next months, just like NK did.

That said, I pointed out earlier in thread that Trumps father was close to Netanyahu, so there might be something going on in those regards.

Sorry I couldnt answer your question fully, but the general Q-attitude is that THEY want war, we dont.

That's where all the money went from the traitor Obama to Iran. It went to funding terrorism and SK and any other means to continue this "war", just like the bush's were doing in Iraq. Trump is actually avoiding wars, like you said. He's visiting countries and most likely saying "if you continue to give money in order to further wars, we will take YOU out to end that flow". Now these countries have a decision to make, and they're not going to want the U.S. coming down on them. WE control the money, the power and what we say goes. It's just that for the past decades, we've had war mongers controlled by the elite who just shoveled # to the public day in and day out. The one thing I'm hoping Trump accomplishes in his most like 2 terms, is get the evil elite and globalists out of our national media. If he can accomplish that, things will go a lot smoother in our country, he also has to hand education back to the states to crack the liberal brain washing agenda. I fully believe the Bushes, Obama and Clintons are all on the same page with that, just saying different things to make you think you're voting one party or the other.

originally posted by: Grambler
I read a lot of these q posts and am interested in them. I dont have much to say because its not my forte; there is more of a bigger picture type mentality that comes with these post than what I usually feel comfortable in contibuting to.

But I wanted to ask a question light of the netanyahu release today of the irans weapons program and the US intel confirming this.

Now please dont take this as an attack on anyone here; I am merely asking a question.

It seems to me that there is a danger of having too much faith in Q.

I know that there is a lot of evidence of things q has said that seems to have been accurate, though admittedly I am by nio means an expert.

However, how would you truly know if you are being fed a 95% truth to encourage your faith on something that is not good.

So for example, with me, I didnt buy the trump strikes on syria because I didnt see any proof assad was guilty.

Now i know that people have said that someone this was still in line with q through various methods.

But lets say we end up bombing Iran based off of netanyahus speech today and the US intel community confirming his speech was accurate.

I am sorry but I have seen too many wars we have been lied in to to give anyone, even trump, the benefit of the cdoubt to launch bombs before they show confirmable evidence in the public there is a good reason for it.

So my question is, will people demand to see tangible evidence before they cheer for a war, or would q's word be enough for people?

again not attacking anyone, just asking an honest question.

I dont think us questioning Q's credibility or identity should matter either way this all unfolds. Q has gotten people involved. Its enlightened some, its realigned peoples beliefs. Its changing the world one Anon at a time. Fake, or not fake, Q has revived a revolutionary spirit. Q has made people realize that they NEED to pay attention, not only to the US, but to the world. Q has brought millions of people together as a collective mind. As if we are all working as one. Where we go one, we go all. This collective mindset will be there for quite a long time, and frankly it's way overdue.

We need to surpass this era of division we are currently in. Political divide, racial divide, et all; it needs to stop. We are not enemies. We are one. We the people, not just of this country (US), but we the people of the world.

a reply to: Grambler


Q is a messenger who's more accurate and better-connected than the MSM. That's how I view him/her/them.

originally posted by: FlyingFox

originally posted by: AnkhMorpork

I don't know, call it prophecy, timeline manipulation, an inevitability, doesn't much matter because we're right in the thick of it now.
PEACE and PROSPERITY and LOVE will just happen of their own accord as a new type of dynamic, of positive reinforcement and a self-fulfilling prophecy. Predictive programming at it's very best and not as a point of manipulation or coercion for selfish gain. They know what they are doing, and why.

Doesn't it boil down to a battle between Good AI and Bad AI?

Whichever side masters the AI Singularity will win.

Sort of like a Vedic text, but with more rainbows.

It's also a war with the tech giants, yes, to try to get ahead of that I would think. Slow it the F down, while getting an IBOR as a starting point, like an Internet Constitution, then an AI one of some kind to put constraints and limitations on it's influence.

What we see with Q in terms of intent is good predictive programming in alignment with timeless values and the spirit of the founding fathers.

True, deep AI is really quite frightening.

If it would destroy our humanity, then it would be no better than the kind of Armageddon that as Pheonix pointed out we may have dodged and have almost completely dodged.

It's a real predicament, the technological singularity.

I think AI will be designed to serve the human being, the only problem being that it will try much too hard and go way too fast.

I hope this isn't just a ruse to give Iran rothschild controlled central banks and force them to accept the IMF loan. Iran is the last country in the world that does not charge their people interest.

Are the mullahs bad for Iran? What is the connection between Uranium 1 and the supposed bombing of Iranian nuclear facilities yesterday?

originally posted by: TheGOAT

The one thing I'm hoping Trump accomplishes in his most like 2 terms, is get the evil elite and globalists out of our national media. If he can accomplish that, things will go a lot smoother in our country, he also has to hand education back to the states to crack the liberal brain washing agenda. I fully believe the Bushes, Obama and Clintons are all on the same page with that, just saying different things to make you think you're voting one party or the other.

Agreed. They FIRST take control of media and universities, before economy, military, politics. The war for hearts and minds must be won first. Fortunately, people are on to them (finally).

NYT leaked Mueller's questions - came from someone associated with Trump's own legal team..

www.nytimes.com...

They're trying to get out ahead of the IG Report methinks.

It also reveals that Mueller intends to entrap Trump the same way they did with Flynn.

I thought the charges against Flynn were dropped?

What's your interpretation of this development?

a reply to: AnkhMorpork

I started a thread a couple hours ago. Didn't Mueller leak the questions? Maybe I misread the article.

Link to thread: www.abovetopsecret.com...