-@TH3WH17ERABB17-Q- Questions. White House Insider's postings- PART 4

a reply to: Perfectenemy

I explained my intention in the post above - hopefully my clarification will better explain what I was getting at.It seems like I maybe didn't explain what I meant too well. Its late here, but if I have time tomorrow I could even try and do a summary myself. Like, start a draft and let you guys add to/ change it.

a reply to: AnkhMorpork

They don’t lie to each other.

They are all about continuous bloodlines.

You think Chelsea doesn’t know Webb’s her dad?

a reply to: dashen

Lmfao.

a reply to: Millions

well. lets brainstorm.
how do we do that thing you said?

originally posted by: Millions
a reply to: dashen

No, of course not. I've been following these threads on and off since the start, so the idea wasn't to appeal to someone like me. And the indexes are very helpful, but not something approachable and 'user-friendly' that can be read in an article format by an outsider. I'm thinking something like a brief Wikipedia article, that kind of thing. Please don't think I'm criticising you, I'm not. I'm trying to figure out a way to get your good work out to more people, by being more accessible.

Great idea: Somehow the threads themselves need to be broken down and the relevant data added to the Q Wiki that these threads and the Q phenom have inspired.

Some day soon that's going to be a valuable resource, however difficult it might be to index and add to the data base.

ATS Q journey immortalized... that would be super cool and groovy.

originally posted by: Millions
a reply to: dashen

No, of course not. I've been following these threads on and off since the start, so the idea wasn't to appeal to someone like me. And the indexes are very helpful, but not something approachable and 'user-friendly' that can be read in an article format by an outsider. I'm thinking something like a brief Wikipedia article, that kind of thing. Please don't think I'm criticising you, I'm not. I'm trying to figure out a way to get your good work out to more people, by being more accessible.

About every time I come in and 'rock the boat', I do end up complaining q doesn't do articles of course, but also implore everyone to take the 'Big Stories' if there are any and at least do OP's with them so I others might notice them. But I'm just a bastard. Note I also drop lots of article / OP ideas (that I won't be able to get to any time soon...)... But I'm just a bastard.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
You just described the Q phenomena lol. Q taught/is teaching us to LEARN. It's like the fish parable he's teaching conspiracy/nutters and on the fence woke folk to fish

a reply to: Greenanon

whatwhatwhaaaaattttt????

you crack me up bruv

originally posted by: Greenanon
a reply to: AnkhMorpork


You think Chelsea doesn’t know Webb’s her dad?

Maybe not until more recently.

We're all related to these boodlines. I'm related directly to both the Rotshchilds and Howards of England. I'm almost royalty and no one's tapped me to lead an evil empire!

I think that too much emphasis is placed on it, except maybe as it relates to old money and Europian structures of evil and corruption.

a reply to: Lilroanie

I prefer to be saved all sorts of guess work / wild goose chases / etc, and have the data dropped, with hyperlinks ideally. Guidebooks, if you will, is how I do mine when I can do the work. Take me years of research insights and streamline it all down the best I can LOL (if you've seen my pieces you'd laugh at that too) so people can come in check it out and come out something of an expert... but I'm just a bastard LOL.

a reply to: dashen

Bob and Alice went for a walk through the forest.

On their way through the forest they stepped in an enormous pile of #.

Warnings were given.

a reply to: Cauliflower

Yes. Luckily, Q realizes he is talking to a whole lot of people who are not trained cryptographers, but are in fact normal people who are determined to seek the truth by whatever means they have available to them. That falls in line with his repeated urging that we work together. Did you have some cryptography expertise to lend to the effort?

a reply to: dashen

Thanks!

Its 3.13 am here, so need to get to sleep. But I was thinking along the lines of the following structure, each section a paragraph or 2 each :

1) What is Q - how they communicate/ advantages of this style of communication ;
2) what seems to be the goals and motivations of Q ;
3) concrete examples of predictions they made / information provided which wasn't previously known, ie - a paragraph on Saudi Arabia ; a paragraph on north Korea, etc. (Which cynics and doubters can easily be referred back to, saving repeat questions through the threads).

Personally, i'd keep it to the less 'out there' stuff to avoid alienating new readers right from the get-go. And it could fit in nicely at the start of your index. Like an intro in a book, after the index.

Anyway, these are my initial thoughts, but others may think otherwise...?

(Sorry for the spelling and grammar - writing this on a tablet in bed).

a reply to: Millions

You guys catch all of that?

Those points are important.

a reply to: Rosinitiate

100% happenstance in the very beginning. I would say it was passive in the very, early stages of the development and adoption of the WWW because no one knew the Internet was going to shape the world the way it has.

The Internet as it sits today has been shaped by 3 main generations of users. The government folks and intelligence agency folks who were around when Internet 1.0 was released had NO CLUE what the hell the Internet was going to become. I'm assuming you know the early beginnings as nothing more than a way to share files between parties over long distances. Public consumption of generation 1 brought us accessible web e-mail, chat rooms, and slow as hell porn downloads. By the time Internet 2.0 came along it was all about MySpace, free music downloads, and video games. The current version of the Internet you are referring (as being weaponized) started with the Egyptian uprising which was initiated via a Facebook and Twitter post by a Google employee who did work for the CIA. THAT is when the Internet and more specifically social media became a tool for disinformation on a global scale. The CIA realized people were stupid enough to openly put every single piece of their personal information out for public consumption and this is what drove the development for mass data mining which drove the need for greater bandwidth which drove the need for greater storage, which drove the need for cloud computing infrastructure, which drove the need for massive bandwidth increases, etc. and around and around we continue to go.

You make it sound like from the beginning in some dark back room a bunch of spooks from the gov and CIA had this grand master plan of what has unfolded before us today. That's absolutely laughable and total BS mate. They had no freakin' clue what they had and they damn sure didn't have a master plan. It would have been impossible to envision mass adoption of something called social media. It simply evolved organically and then the spooks got heavily involved with manipulation.

It was only up until 2015 that Sergey Brin was invited to attend the Bilderberg meetings. Why do you think that was? It took those old ass elitists long enough to figure out how to actually use Google as a political weapon and that was only 3 years ago. Now WE know that the Internet and social media can be easily used as a force to spread disinformation on a wide scale so I still hold to my earlier statement that people are just lazy and allow technology to make them incredibly stupid.

Back to Q.....any recent posts or have they been quiet tonight? ATS is my only source on this subject right now via phone, so bear with me.

a reply to: Millions

gotcha. fine idea. also i feel the photos of the EO pen, shots from AF1 over NK, a desk at camp david ( a very special place) all would be good confirmation evidence as well

a reply to: dashen

Maybe set it up like a Mirageman post? Example Here

a reply to: Greenanon

They ARE important, Greenaon. Maybe not to you. But it isn't for you, is it?

That was a brief suggested example of a structure, which, like I said, is there to be changed or added to. Instead of your snide little dismissal, why not be constructive?

My point is that there's no point being the wisest or most intelligent and most intelligent guy on the planet if no one is listening to a word you say. Ever heard of the Cassandra in Greek mythology?

Why is this thread so hostile, by the way? That's another suggestion is make - try to attract people to what you're saying instead of alienating them. No one wants to spend time in a toxic online environment. What happened to all that talk of positive energy a few weeks back? You'd rather spend time on bible-code type letter sequences and posts about Obama clones?

a reply to: Millions

he wasnt being sarcastic.
and i like the idea.
for part V i guess