Discussions Pertaining to Q

Historical insights & thoughts about the world we live in - and the social conditioning exerted upon us by past and current propaganda.

Re: THE "CHATBOX"

Unread postby nonhocapito on Sun Nov 11, 2018 5:41 pm

@Observer: I am at a loss as to why you listed how many times some names are returned in a search on Cluesforum. I don't understand what is that supposed to prove. As to the other point you make, regarding the convoluted indirect way in which Q phrases its messages: nobody with a little grain of salt is arguing that Q is a person like me or you. Q is obviously a military intelligence operation, with direct link to the White House. If you still think this doesn't make it at the very least interesting and worth discussing, there's probably nothing I can write here that'd change your mind. Sure the cryptic language is annoying, some equally foggy explanations have been advanced by Q themselves as to why, but that's beside the point for me.

It seems to me that you guys are not getting this Q stuff.

I'll repeat it: The so called Q drops, whatever is their purpose, come from Trump's office. This is obvious for countless reasons and has been extensively proved. If you consider yourselves good researchers you can dig a little deeper and find out for yourselves. This is kinda bigger than when Obama said: "we have no time to lose with the Flat Earth society", though in a similar vein.

It being so, hence my question (which I am posting in the Chatbox because of its raw, embryonic, political form): what the heck is happening? Why are the Q operatives dropping to their very large and very attentive audience the idea that all these events might have been staged? (Because it's the obvious implication of that "drop", that these event are not real, if anything because it's fairly understood by many that at least David Hogg is nothing but an agent.)

I mean, sure, this is not like saying that they are finally coming out with how these events are 100% faked and nobody dies... they aren't, not in so many words. We know that nobody in the media or even in the recesses of 8ch.net is ever allowed to step up to that level. But, this fakery stuff is not a religious dogma, am I right? That Hoi.Polloi sentence you quote doesn't make sense to me, as it is. If something happens in the media that might be of the utmost importance, which involves deception and strange new tactics, but neglects to mention fakery, I should dismiss it outright or ignore it? That's narrow-minded at the very least.

In my opinion you have to be rather dense if you are not in the least surprised that this kind of info is coming from none other than the close entourage of the President of the United States, and still sing yourself the song that nothing matters and it's all bullshit. To me these changes in the game and in the way the game is played matter enormously, and I wish there was somebody around here feeling the same way and willing to scratch their brains around it. To be honest, I'd rather risk being wrong but asking myself a few questions in the process, than being "always right" by dismissing it all.
nonhocapito
Administrator
 
Posts: 2555
Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2010 5:38 am
Location: Italy

Re: THE "CHATBOX"

Unread postby aa5 on Sun Nov 11, 2018 5:59 pm

My feeling is Q is just someone with knowledge like us of the reality going on. And they built up a big following on anonymous message boards. Sort of like how a religion can be built with someone who is very wise, by letting out cryptic truths now and then that surprise people and bind them to your wisdom.

But lets say you are right in that Q is actually a part of the Trump administration. I had this idea that instead of completely denying the fake reality, the US as the most advanced state in the world, could go into the 'meta' realm. Where some viewers would know the events are fake but still be watching the story.

I don't know how many of you have watched wrestling. But you might wonder why adults watch it if you've never 'gotten into it'. The thing is in the shows they build in all this 'behind the scenes' stuff into the storylines. Like various dramas over who the owners of the corporations are pushing to become the next superstars, which wrestlers get top billing like at the start and the end of the shows, the politics behind the title matches, etc.

And like in other fictional shows there are surprise turn of events, changing alliances, betrayals and so forth.

You are hoping your favorite wrestlers get more time during the major televised shows. The fans even have some impact, as wrestlers which elicit strong crowd reactions(positive or negative), strong fan engagement, the corporation gives more time on the show too. In a wrestling tv show less than 50% of the show is actual wrestling in the ring. Instead there is a lot on the microphone, behind the scenes cut scenes, etc.

Trump himself is arguably already part of this 'meta' story. Where in the story he is the President, but he is also the leader of the resistance. And he is calling out the 'fake news'. But hes fighting the deep state, and liberal/globalist conspiracies.
aa5
Member
 
Posts: 259
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2016 3:03 am

Re: THE "CHATBOX"

Unread postby nonhocapito on Sun Nov 11, 2018 6:16 pm

aa5 » 1 minute ago wrote:My feeling is Q is just someone with knowledge like us of the reality going on. And they built up a big following on anonymous message boards. Sort of like how a religion can be built with someone who is very wise, by letting out cryptic truths now and then that surprise people and bind them to your wisdom.

But lets say you are right in that Q is actually a part of the Trump administration. I had this idea that instead of completely denying the fake reality, the US as the most advanced state in the world, could go into the 'meta' realm. Where some viewers would know the events are fake but still be watching the story.

Trump himself is arguably already part of this 'meta' story. Where in the story he is the President, but he is also the leader of the resistance. And he is calling out the 'fake news'. But hes fighting the deep state, and liberal/globalist conspiracies.


I agree on the possibility of the "meta" game as you describe it; but, as I argued above, there is no way that Q is "just a person with knowledge". There have been several instances of info and hints dropped by Q that connect undoubtedly to Trump's entourage and actions, if in a convoluted, strangely cryptic way. To me there is little doubt at this point that Q is a military intelligence operation that is part of the activities taken by the Trump administration (or rather, by the military) to affect the current political/media climate.

Perhaps Q is a way to curb the free thinkers into another corral of ideas that are prepackaged for them; perhaps it is a political arm to counter the leftist media; perhaps this is really preparing for a military coup, since it does seem steeped in pro military rhetoric; perhaps it's another jew plot to rule the world; most likely a bit of it all. But as I said above, it's a new kind of game; it's being played in the realm of media fakery, using fakery as a political currency to taint the enemy. That's enough for me to make it a worthy subject of research, one that should occupy our forum a lot more than it does.

Sure, I now see that we are not "Exposing Media Fakery" anymore. We are now the forum for "Exposing Mass Deception" (who decided that?), but this would make it important to expose Q even more, even if it didn't brush on fakery at all, right? We all seem to agree it's a mass deception, no?

(BTW, seriously, "Exposing mass deception"? Should I understand that someone thought "media fakery" was too small a world for us, or that we have already successfully exposed the shit out it? So we're moving on to new and better things? Gee. I would have thought that the cracks in the texture of Hollywood, or the widespread revelation of the infamy of NASA would warrant hanging on as an/the authority in the world of media fakery a little longer...)
nonhocapito
Administrator
 
Posts: 2555
Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2010 5:38 am
Location: Italy

Re: THE "CHATBOX"

Unread postby simonshack on Sun Nov 11, 2018 7:00 pm

nonhocapito wrote:

Sure, I now see that we are not "Exposing Media Fakery" anymore. We are now the forum for "Exposing Mass Deception" (who decided that?), but this would make it important to expose Q even more, even if it didn't brush on fakery at all, right? We all seem to agree it's a mass deception, no?
(BTW, seriously, "Exposing mass deception"? I should understand that someone thought "media fakery" was too small a world for us, or that we have already successfully exposed the shit out it? So we're moving on to new and better things? Gee. I would have thought that the cracks in the texture of Hollywood, or the widespread revelation of the infamy of NASA would warrant hanging on as an authority in the world of media fakery a little longer...)


Dear Nonho,

I was the one who suggested 'updating' our forum's subtitle to "Exposing Mass Deception" - and I did that for a good reason which I honestly believe is a fairly appropriate "upgrade" of the description of the collective efforts that we do here. As you must have noticed, we are now exposing more than just "media fakery" - per se. However, this certainly doesn't mean that I'm discouraging in any way the research into (what you perfectly describe as) "the cracks in the texture of Hollywood, or the widespread revelation of the infamy of NASA". Nor would I ever discourage any research into this "Q" thing - which I unfortunately haven't been able to follow much of late (for reasons that you may imagine), so please keep us posted about it, I am personally very happy to learn more about it.

So please feel free to open a new thread about the "Q thing"- and tell us more about it. That's what this forum is about - discussing & diffusing intelligent thoughts about the world we live in. If you're lamenting that not many people are discussing the "Q" thing, this shouldn't discourage you.

I will, for the moment, concentrate on my "TYCHOS thing" - which is also something that almost no one seems to be be interested about. Yet, I will nonetheless keep on diffusing my scientific findings - until the very last day of my life - no matter how few people care about the subject matter.
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6773
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: italy

Re: THE "CHATBOX"

Unread postby SacredCowSlayer on Sun Nov 11, 2018 8:33 pm

nonhocapito » November 11th, 2018, 12:16 pm wrote:Sure, I now see that we are not "Exposing Media Fakery" anymore. We are now the forum for "Exposing Mass Deception" (who decided that?), but this would make it important to expose Q even more, even if it didn't brush on fakery at all, right? We all seem to agree it's a mass deception, no?

(BTW, seriously, "Exposing mass deception"? Should I understand that someone thought "media fakery" was too small a world for us, or that we have already successfully exposed the shit out it? So we're moving on to new and better things? Gee. I would have thought that the cracks in the texture of Hollywood, or the widespread revelation of the infamy of NASA would warrant hanging on as an/the authority in the world of media fakery a little longer...)


Dear nonhocapito,

Please don’t conflate the change to “Exposing Mass Deception” with some notion that we aren’t exposing media fakery anymore.

It’s really (in my opinion) a reflection of the fact that there are some topics on Cluesforum that touch on the former, but don’t quite fit within the more narrow confines of “media fakery.”

So, it’s only a “change” in the sense that it more accurately describes the research, and provides our members and readers with a measure of precision and clarity as we move ahead. There isn’t anything pretentious about it, not that you used that word.

I certainly do NOT pretend for a moment that the study and exposition of media fakery is somehow at an end. On the contrary. I’ve been delighted to post on the old Arizona (“Gabby”) topic, as well as the most recent mass “shooting” story out of California.

While I have been reluctant to pay much attention to Q, “pizzagate,” or “Anonymous,” I’m not inclined (even in the slightest) to suggest that our members should avoid researching a matter (such as this), and placing it on this Forum. I DO pay close attention to the things posted here, so who knows, you may very well convince me to spend some time exploring this issue.

I think you and aa5 make interesting (and indeed compelling) points. My apologies for the dismissive tone of my previous post on this. Admittedly that was my “knee jerk” reaction here. But such things are known to cause blind spots. So I appreciate you causing me to at least reconsider it.

Also, yes, I absolutely agree with you that this topic is (in my words) smack in the middle of what is contemplated by the mission of this Forum.

Sincerely,

SCS :)
scs

scs@cluesforum.info
SacredCowSlayer
Administrator
 
Posts: 652
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2015 9:44 pm

Re: THE "CHATBOX"

Unread postby Observer on Mon Nov 12, 2018 7:28 am



Well, first you took a screenshot of a post, written by what you yourself admit is obviously a group of psyop operation liars (who continuously are group-authoring those thousands of ambiguous riddle encoded distraction lies, hoping to ensnare in the time-wasting wiki-leaks-snowden-style honeypot all folks interested in the kind of weak conspiracy-theory which doesn't admit that victims are fake) and this post which you dropped here NEVER admits fake-footage and fake-victims, and you yourself ambiguously dropped that Q-post here hit-and-run-style WITHOUT clearly sharing what you think that encoded screenshot means.

(Kind of like how you also recently ambiguously "dropped" hit-and-run-style an "I hate Islam terrorists" video here WITHOUT clearly sharing your opinion about it there as well.) viewtopic.php?p=2406453#p2406453

Anyway, about your Q-drop above, now you've finally come out in subsequent posts and boldly made your current opinion on this particular "drop" clear:

nonhocapito » November 12th, 2018, 2:41 am wrote:The so called Q drops, whatever is their purpose, come from Trump's office. This is obvious for countless reasons and has been extensively proved.

...this kind of info is coming from none other than the close entourage of the President of the United States...


OK, thank you, so finally you have clearly stated WHO you think is the probable group authoring these fictional psyop distractions intended to fool people and waste 1000s of hours of people's time.

And, thank you for having finally come out and clearly stated WHAT you currently think is the meaning of that admittedly liar-authored alternative-media-broadcast "drop":

nonhocapito wrote:...the Q operatives [are] dropping to their very large and very attentive audience the idea that all these events might have been staged...

...the obvious implication of that "drop", [is] that these event are not real...


OK Nonhocapito, I agree with you about the probable WHO, but I disagree with you about the probable WHAT this drop is intended to imply.

Your current opinion, which you finally have stated clearly now is that Trump is attempting to reveal the fake-footage and fake-victims reality we discuss here.

And thinking more deeply about your past posts you have previously stated twice recently your theory that Trump is heroically attempting to reveal the fake-footage and fake-victims reality we discuss here:

nonhocapito wrote:
https://nypost.com/2018/10/29/trump-acc ... ger-in-us/

I don't think we on this forum are reacting with the appropriate amount of awe and wonderment to this. I mean, it is obvious, to me, that Trump is talking about our kind of fakery. And that's unbelievable, I do realize. :mellow:


nonhocapito wrote:...what the Qanon OP seems to have established is that the attrition is between the Military, POTUS and the NSA (the intelligence arm of the military) on one side,
vs
CIA, the media (isn't it amazing that the expression "fake news" is now currency?) the Mossad and the "evil cabals" (Rothschilds, bankers, silicon valley etc) on the other.


Look, as you yourself know very well, Trump could NEVER and would NEVER heroically attempt to reveal the fake-footage and fake-victims reality we discuss here, because he himself participated in the pre-prepared green-screen forged 'footage' of him in the 9/11 movie 'live at ground zero' lamenting over the 'all the 3,000 lost lives'. viewtopic.php?p=2406256#p2406256

Trump's use of the phrase "fake news" is a simple selfish ploy to label any criticism about his actions as being fake, so "don't listen to such criticism of my actions." His selfish use of the phrase "fake" has actually sullied the word, not helped us at all.

Simon's term Media-fakery is supposed to mean forged-footage and forged-victims, but (Ashkenazi-team)Trump has unfortunately (not heroically, not courageously, not beneficially: instead quite UNFORTUNATELY) cleverly preemptively corrupted the phrase "fake news" to mean something else altogether: "Opinions which I disagree with, opinions which criticize my actions, and 'facts' which I maintain are incorrect." Great, so next time someone hears about "media fakery" the image that will appear in their mind is, "Someone complaining about the media reporting about a truth, a truth which the user of the term 'media fakery' simply doesn't like, just like Trump and his 'fake news' claims. Anyone talking about 'media fakery' must be, due to discredit through association with the Trump-pushed 'fake news' phrase, trying to avoid uncomfortable truths."

(Just as the phrase "anti-semitic" is a simple selfish ploy to label any criticism about Ashkenazi non-Semite Israeli's actions of trial-less murders of the actual Semites the Palestinians via planes/helicopters/tanks everyday as being racist, so "don't listen to such criticism of Israeli soldiers' actions nor Israeli order-giving military heads, nor the Israeli heads of state, nor the American heads of state who sponsor such real terrorism against real victims using American tax-money, criticizing such state-sponsored murders is itself now illegal hate speech against Semites, haha, even though Ashkenazis are not Semites, and even though the actual victims the Palestinians are the actual Semites." /rant)

Anyway, I disagree with your current theory that the Trump team's ambiguous Q-drop above is trying to inspire people to think about the possibility of the fake-footage and fake-victims reality we discuss here.

I think chances are much higher that the ambiguous Q-drop above is trying to inspire people to think that Broward County officials and the actors involved are guilty of treason for participating in 'FALSE-FLAG terrorism which actually killed real Americans!'

Trump-team is thus authoring Q-drops which paint Trump-team as valiantly leaking info about those dastardly killers and those dastardly actors involved in the recent killer false flag terrorist attacks. What's next, will Q ambiguously release hints that Bush and Cheney killed 'those 3,000 lives actually lost' on 9/11?

Trump knows that the 9/11 footage is fake and that nobody died, since he participated in it as an actor, and thus his team's Q-drops are NOT trying to inspire people to think about the possibility of the fake-footage and fake-victims.

If Trump was heroically trying to reveal fake-footage and fake-victims he could easily have Q-drops mention that reality, or provide evidence of that reality.

Trump's Q-drops are mentioning Broward County perps, to enrage conspiracy theorists against the false-flag-perpetuating agents and interview-giving actors, but NEVER mentioning at all (not even in mysterious coded form) the essential fact that the supposed 'dead victims' are entirely fake.

Thus, Hoi's reply to your "Q-team is revealing the truth" push, is the perfectly concise logical answer, to prevent folks from wasting 1000s of hours immersing themselves in 1000s of encoded riddle posts authored by a group who will NEVER admit the 'victims' of 9/11 through present were faked. I need to quote Hoi's vital point again for posterity:

hoi.polloi wrote:Do they discuss true facts of fakery?


Q refuses to mention fake-victims at all, not even in the slightest, not even ambiguously, while logical folks at CluesForum clearly boldly courageously prove fake victims in every 'terror attack' from 9/11 to present. :)
Observer
Banned
 
Posts: 167
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2015 12:47 am
Location: Interwebs

Re: THE "CHATBOX"

Unread postby nonhocapito on Mon Nov 12, 2018 9:23 am

Your current opinion, which you finally have stated clearly now is that Trump is attempting to reveal the fake-footage and fake-victims reality we discuss here

Actually no, I've never said that. I don't believe that. But I think he is dabbling in it. My best guess is that he's letting the other side know he knows the stuff is fake. Or, scratch that; he might be just defusing it. That's as far as I would go.

Trump has (or perhaps the people scripting his persona have), if not introduced, used the "fake news" descriptor to the point of making it currency in the political world and the media. Doesn't this blow your mind? Do you remember the world of 10 years ago at all? The purpose of the "fake news" meme, to my understanding, is certainly not to directly emancipate people, like we try to do here, but rather to undermine or entirely reform the power media conglomerates have. It's hard to tell the end game, but it seems quite a relevant issue if it concerns redesigning the way propaganda is fed to the masses.

Q refuses to mention fake-victims at all, not even in the slightest, not even ambiguously, while logical folks at CluesForum clearly boldly courageously prove fake victims in every 'terror attack' from 9/11 to present.

You are comparing apples and oranges. Q isn't a free player but, as I've said, a military intelligence operation. Do you compare yourself to them? Are you a military intelligence agent? Do you compare yourself with the actions and words of the POTUS? Are you in the business of politics? I assume the answer to the above is no. So of course you will express your ideas in a free-thinking way, while they will express controlled ideas and words with specific intent, in order for them to be played on the global scene. Quite different approaches.

Besides, this is not about who adheres to our "fakery" credo or who doesn't. This is about how and by whom the mass deception is being conducted out there.
The media could until a year ago go on and on about this or that mass shooting or terrorist attack, but now seem to encounter a barrage of skepticism at each step and cannot hold these stories up high much anymore. They seem to be dissolving ever so rapidly. It seems that Trump and its simplified message might have a lot to do with how much people now believe in news media. Whatever the reasons for it, do you think this would be equally achieved if Trump came out tomorrow and stated that 9/11 had been a staged operation?

You seem to be questioning the way I have put forward my questions on this issue. I may be elliptic here or there, for lack of time, and I apologize for this; there is now way around it, unfortunately. But I'd like to remind you that this is the "chatbox". Not a formal thread on Q or Trump. The ideas here are just being tested and are not by any means complete or fully formed. Should I have more time and a vision to put forward I'll gladly start a thread on this. In the meantime, I'd be thrilled if someone else started it. This seems to me much more cogent than the Holohoax, for important as that mass deception might still be.

That screenshot I posted earlier, BTW, comes from the website qanon.pub, a collector of Qanon's posts on 8ch.net/qresearch. My bad if I didn't put the source, but this stuff is out there and it takes a second to pull it up. ALL posts of Q are collected on that website and scores of others, going two or three years back, so there is a lot to investigate and to look through. That's another reason why it's absurd not discussing this here, because its resonance out there, at least in the U.S., seems to be very significant. What bothers me and leads me back here to answer posts is just the dismissal attitude; as if everything had already been figured out. Close to NOTHING has been figured out.
nonhocapito
Administrator
 
Posts: 2555
Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2010 5:38 am
Location: Italy

Re: THE "CHATBOX"

Unread postby Observer on Mon Nov 12, 2018 11:26 am

nonhocapito » November 12th, 2018, 6:23 pm wrote:
Your current opinion, which you finally have stated clearly now is that Trump is attempting to reveal the fake-footage and fake-victims reality we discuss here

Actually no, I've never said that.


Oh really?

nonhocapito wrote:
https://nypost.com/2018/10/29/trump-acc ... ger-in-us/

... it is obvious, to me, that Trump is talking about our kind of fakery.


I think readers can decide if you did or didn't say Trump is talking about our kind of media fakery.

nonhocapito wrote:Trump has (or perhaps the people scripting his persona have), if not introduced, used the "fake news" descriptor to the point of making it currency in the political world and the media. Doesn't this blow your mind?


OK, since you're once again saying Trump's "fake news" phrase is an amazing reveal, I'll have to once again post my reply which I think you are ignoring:

Trump's use of the phrase "fake news" is NOT the "amazing reveal" which you are currently assuming. Basically, Trump's implied definition of "fake news" is NOT AT ALL close to CluesForum's desired definition of "fake news":

Observer wrote:Look, as you yourself know very well, Trump could NEVER and would NEVER heroically attempt to reveal the fake-footage and fake-victims reality we discuss here, because he himself participated in the pre-prepared green-screen forged 'footage' of him in the 9/11 movie 'live at ground zero' lamenting over the 'all the 3,000 lost lives'. viewtopic.php?p=2406256#p2406256

Trump's use of the phrase "fake news" is a simple selfish ploy to label any criticism about his actions as being fake, so "don't listen to such criticism of my actions." His selfish use of the phrase "fake" has actually sullied the word, not helped us at all.

Simon's term Media-fakery is supposed to mean forged-footage and forged-victims, but (Ashkenazi-team)Trump has unfortunately (not heroically, not courageously, not beneficially: instead quite UNFORTUNATELY) cleverly preemptively corrupted the phrase "fake news" to mean something else altogether: "Opinions which I disagree with, opinions which criticize my actions, and 'facts' which I maintain are incorrect." Great, so next time someone hears about "media fakery" the image that will appear in their mind is, "Someone complaining about the media reporting about a truth, a truth which the user of the term 'media fakery' simply doesn't like, just like Trump and his 'fake news' claims. Anyone talking about 'media fakery' must be, due to discredit through association with the Trump-pushed 'fake news' phrase, trying to avoid uncomfortable truths."


And about your "Q isn't free to post the whole truth, but let's read deeply and be amazed by all of Q's half-truths" stance:

nonhocapito wrote:
Q refuses to mention fake-victims at all, not even in the slightest, not even ambiguously, while logical folks at CluesForum clearly boldly courageously prove fake victims in every 'terror attack' from 9/11 to present.


You are comparing apples and oranges. Q isn't a free player...


Actually, since the fictional character "Q" is not officially on the record and since "Q" is totally anonymous and does not have any actual-name connected to any actual-flesh-and-blood-prosecutable human, Trump CAN choose whatever subject and whatever evidence Q-posts "leak" (please don't back-pedal on your strongly stated "Trump is the source" opinion): if Trump REALLY wanted Q-posts to win against the "fake news" media (please don't back-pedal on your strongly stated "Trump vs media" opinion), then Trump could easily have his proxy Q write, "Here is some clear evidence that the media is playing fake videos with fake victims. Proof 'terror attack A' had fake victims, Proof 'terror attack B' had fake victims, Proof 'terror attack C' had fake victims. And proof that the mainstream media played forged 'footage' of the 'victims' being 'killed'. Boom, Boom, Boom." THAT kind of righteous post by this "supposedly free to post the truth Snowden-type Q-character", leaking undeniable evidence of fake-footage and fake-victims, would absolutely destroy his supposed "enemies" ABC, CBS, CNN, NBC, Washington Post, New York Times, etc.

But Trump can't spill the beans about fake-footage and fake-victims because he would be spilling the beans about HIMSELF. Your current "possibly honestly bean-spilling by using the phrase 'fake news' hero Trump" himself participated in the fake-footage and fake-victim 9/11 movie 'live from ground zero' 17 years ago, and thus he is no doubt still CONTINUING to participate (or at the very least CONTINUING to NEVER reveal) the fake-footage fake-victim "terror/shooting" movies continuously being broadcast by the media he supposedly hates right now during his presidency.

nonhocapito wrote:ALL posts of Q are collected on that website and scores of others, going two or three years back, so there is a lot to investigate and to look through. That's another reason why it's absurd not discussing this here, because its resonance out there, at least in the U.S., seems to be very significant. What bothers me and leads me back here to answer posts is just the dismissal attitude; as if everything had already been figured out. Close to NOTHING has been figured out.


Actually, once we figured out that the 9/11 "footage" (both "professional" and matching "amateur") was fake, every moment of subsequent "analysis" and "considering the possibility that SOME of the fiction movie can tell us about the reality of controlled demolition method" was indeed ALL WASTED TIME. Since the "footage" is fake, there is nothing about the real world to learn from it. Case closed

Similarly, once you figured out that the Q "leaks" (whether "Trump-authored" or "Trump-team-authored" or "military-authored" or "CIA-authored" or "Tavistock-authored" or "Mossad-authored" or "Je(w)suit-authored" or "Vatican-authored" or "Banker-authored" or whoever) are fictional lies written by non-altruistic liars, every moment of subsequent "analysis" and "considering the possibility that SOME of the fiction posts can tell us about the reality of what's going on in the political world" is indeed ALL WASTED TIME. Since the "posts" are fictional pysop sentences written by non-altruistic liars, there is nothing about the real world to learn from it. Case closed

Yes, I (and Hoi, and others here) are rightly being VERY dismissive of this Snowden-leaks-hero-style-honey-pot which you've invested 1000s of hours analyzing, a trap which your ego has become trapped in due to the number of hours you don't want to admit were all a waste, a convoluted waste of time which you keep (in my opinion) wrongly encouraging CluesForum readers to also start spending 1000s of hours analyzing.

Note, even though you keep calling us not-interested-in-Q-lies folks "dense" for not reading 1000s of Q-lies, I am not saying your pushing of Q proves you are a shill maliciously purposefully trying to lead us to a honey-pot - an accusation which you successfully managed to tar Fred with, when he encouraged folks to check out the Arizona actor evidence at DGB's honey-pot site.

Fred duly admitted basically, "Maybe DGB is a shill, and maybe many of his posts are wrong, for example about Nazis etc, but there is some evidence being released at that site specifically about Arizona which shows specific actors being used in multiple roles/events."

Similarly, you (Nonhocapito) duly admitted basically, "The author group pretending to be this Q individual are definitely pysop operation shills, and maybe many of their posts are wrong, but there is some evidence being released by Q which gets people thinking that maybe these terror-events are false-flags. Isn't that amazing? Let's investigate Q posts deeply!"

I think a difference between you two is: Fred was called a shill for encouraging CluesForum readers to check out some evidence presented on a shill's site (DBG), Fred got mad about being called a shill, Fred started calling folks here shills in return, and thus Fred got banned, while in your case nobody is calling you a shill (I certainly am not calling you a shill), nobody thinks you are PURPOSEFULLY trying to lead us into a dead-end waste of time, we simply think (I simply think) you have ACCIDENTALLY gotten yourself trapped, through investment of time and energy, in the over-analysis of a simple situation: you are reading, and encouraging us to read, a bunch of lies written by a bunch of liars.

The fact that Trump-team (or whoever) is now admitting through Q that maybe actors are involved in "these false-flag terror-events" is not so amazing to me, since what these Q posts are doing (through the sin of not providing any evidence of fake victims) is propping up the grand lie that "people are actually being killed in these FALSE-FLAG terror events!!!"

So Team-Q is MERELY vaguely pointing a finger for 8chan to go attack with a bunch of words (or maybe even attack with violence) some low-level shooting-interview witness-actors and sheriff-actor sacrifices, with the goal of continuing to uphold the "Bush killed 3,000 on 9/11 - Broward Officials killed school-children recently - terror attacks kill real human" lies. Pointing out perps must be done TOGETHER with pointing out the reality that the perps FAKED THE DEATHS OF ALL THE VICTIMS.

Please, wake us up when Team-Q posts evidence that nobody died in that fake shooting, or in any terror/shooting over the past few decades. That's when we (that's when I) will be interested and will wholeheartedly be able to say Thank You for pointing us to Q, Nonhocapito. :)
Last edited by Observer on Mon Nov 12, 2018 1:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Observer
Banned
 
Posts: 167
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2015 12:47 am
Location: Interwebs

Re: THE "CHATBOX"

Unread postby kickstones on Mon Nov 12, 2018 11:32 am

"That's another reason why it's absurd not discussing this here, because its resonance out there, at least in the U.S., seems to be very significant."

Yes, but so is 'Pizzagate', yet we are not allowed to discuss this topic on here. And this topic (Pizzagate) and its followers (Pizzagators) are one of the Q's main output and audience, he has strung them along for a long time now.

As recent as last week he posted this image below.....

Image

And more recently.....

Image

For those unaware Lynn Rothschild is HRC main backer and Clinton Foundation is heavily implicated in Pizzagate.

My take is both political sides have incriminating info on each other, Q just a means of keeping the Clinton team in check.
kickstones
Member
 
Posts: 250
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2013 1:15 pm

Re: THE "CHATBOX"

Unread postby nonhocapito on Mon Nov 12, 2018 12:05 pm

You are right, kickstones, Pizzagate is exactly part of the same kind of psyop as Q, of bringing people to one side by quietly exposing or hinting at horrible deeds of the other side, as opposed to blaring propaganda through the media or bullhorning theories through the so called alternate media. It's a remarkable strategy, it seems to work for some, activating distrust as it seems to have happened with the Clintons, but then again is ignored or dismissed by most... if everything is under control of the same players, who all agree on the final goal and are all equally corrupted, and who also control the fake opposition, why would none other than the Presidency of the US be invested first hand in this particular conspiracy (I mean Q, not pizzagate), which seem to have such short legs in the media? Mystery.
I'm not denying this is all probably theater, but it sure is a new kind of show. (Anyway I've long been saying that I don't subscribe to the idea that there is only one player, the jewlluminamist or something, controlling everything. I tend to believe there are several actors contending for the price. In my opinion there is room to wonder what player is using Q and to what end.)
Anyway, I don't think there's any limitation on discussing pizzagate here on Cluesforum, is there? Why would that be?
nonhocapito
Administrator
 
Posts: 2555
Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2010 5:38 am
Location: Italy

Re: THE "CHATBOX"

Unread postby Observer on Mon Nov 12, 2018 2:02 pm

By the way, I agree with you Nonhocapito about the fact that even though there is collusion between these various super-wealthy hoax-creating families, there also is of course competition between them as they vie for more power and more wealth.

Still, the space hoaxers of Russia don't have the balls to expose the space hoaxers of America, since they would be exposing their own powering-grabbing money-grabbing technique: fake footage. In the same vein, I think proven victim hoaxers like Trump-team will never have the balls to expose proven victim hoaxers like CIA-team, since they would be exposing their own power-grabbing money-grabbing technique: fake footage and fake victims. No matter how much they seem to be "fighting against the other teams", Trump-team must also themselves be guilty of having faked some of the terror/shooting events during Trump's presidency, for various reasons, right?

Which is why, even if some "insider-info-having members of Putin's team" started cryptically "releasing" sentences which appear to imply "Group ABC, and specifically agents XYZ, is responsible for the false flag attack of 9/11 (and/or more recent false flag attacks" I would reply the same way I am about these "Trump-team Q releases", namely: I'm not impressed unless the "leaks" being "released" clearly state (and provide September-Clues-style Clues-Forum-style evidence) that all the official victims were faked and that nobody died.

Still, since you've said your piece and I've said my piece, fellow thinker Nonhocapito, I should now finish this back-and-forth little debate by saying: it would be shill-like if I were to try to shutdown your right to post your theories about "what we can learn by studying the posts of Q" (or Snowden, or whoever the possible truth revealing hero is this month) because your theories about Q's posts might actually contain a gem or two usable truth (as all such honey-pot psyops do, to pull in intelligent thinkers) so please do start a thread and share what you have learned so far.

Seriously, even better than simply hoping someone else here at CluesForum will do it, I think YOU are the person here who has spent the most time studying Q's many posts so far. Perhaps my guess of "1000s of hours contemplating 1000s of posts" is overstating the time you've invested, perhaps it is more like 100s of hours contemplating 100s of posts, but the bottom line is: you have probably spent a lot of time reading Q's posts, and since you are a well-respected long-time contributor here, you can probably do the best job of presenting whatever has been revealed by the Q-posts.

And I will concede, that even though Trump-team/Q-team isn't admitting fake-footage and fake-victims, it is interesting that Trump criticized the mainstream media, criticism which did push folks who like Trump into trusting the mainstream media outlets less and trusting the alternative internet-based "amateur" media outlets more (even though perhaps the long-con goal is to simply send folks who DON'T like Trump running back even stronger to their mainstream media sources, as the left seem to be doing), and it is interesting that Q pointed out that some officials and some interviewees in the Broward-terror-event might be liars (even though perhaps the long-con goal is to simply send folks who DON'T trust faceless-Q back even stronger to their favorite face-showing alternative-media sources), so OK Nonhocapito, your main point that the game is (slightly) changing is true.

And yet, again, I feel, for balance, there is a need for me to also say again: this "game-changing" is very slight, no big changes are happening, the war-initiating lies and hoaxes are continuing as always, the daily loss of human rights are continuing as always, the wealthiest parasitic 0.001% still own 99.999% of the world's capital and thus 1000 masters are still enslaving 7 billion slaves (or whatever the actual number of humans currently living is), so with the exception of CluesForum, all other "revelation" sources refuse to admit 9/11's 3,000 fake victims, so all other "revelation" sources are merely half-truth limited-hangouts, and all those half-truth limited-hangouts are not done with honest or altruistic or beneficial motivations at all, they are merely done because honest altruistic beneficial posters on CluesForum basically forced their hand. So even though it is interesting that various hoaxer-teams have been forced to do the limited-hangout action of admitting a little-bit-of-mainstream-media-lies and a little-bit-of-terror-lies, it still is not satisfying to me, since the result is still: all non-CluesForum folks still think victims actually died in all of these "terror/shooting" psyops, and thus these limited-hangout finger-pointing "revelations" simply result in folks arguing about "WHO really is responsible for the deaths of the 9/11 3,000 - WHO really is responsible for the deaths of the recent terror/shootings?"

Alright, I keep promising to shut-up, so I need to keep my word. Please feel free to start a many-paged thread about Q, Nonhocapito. I won't waste our time & energy further by engaging in a debate with you there. I'll let your elucidations there stand, about all the thoughts which have arisen in your respected mind, based on the many hours of contemplation you have altruistically done, over the course of your in-depth research into the whole Q phenomenon, from start to present and into the future. And please don't think I'm being sarcastic, I'm being serious. Respect to you for your research, and your sharing, and yes your continued efforts to always keep the focus on media fakery. And let's always remind everyone every time that the evidence shows: the official victims are always faked. Amen. :)
Last edited by Observer on Mon Nov 12, 2018 3:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Observer
Banned
 
Posts: 167
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2015 12:47 am
Location: Interwebs

Re: THE "CHATBOX"

Unread postby SacredCowSlayer on Mon Nov 12, 2018 3:00 pm

To be clear, there is NO blanket prohibition here regarding discussions of “Pizzagate.” Although the history of it is a tad muddled perhaps.
I’m going to simply start a new Topic entitled “Discussions Pertaining to Q,” and I’m happy to change that if a better suggestion comes along. Do any of our members have an objection to this topic including the things related to “Pizzagate” as well? I don’t know how closely related such things are.
Please let me know.

For now I will toss the pre-existing posts on the Q phenomenon in this topic.

Thanks,

SCS
scs

scs@cluesforum.info
SacredCowSlayer
Administrator
 
Posts: 652
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2015 9:44 pm

Re: Discussions Pertaining to Q

Unread postby aa5 on Mon Nov 12, 2018 9:27 pm

Do you have examples where Q predicted something ahead of time, where there is no realistic way he could have predicted that except if he was an insider?

I have friends who are believers in the fake resistance of WikiLeaks, Snowden, Alex Jones, etc.. and of course they believe in Q. But the predictions they have posted that Q makes, like dates where all these Democrats are going to be indicted never happen(in the examples I have seen them post).
aa5
Member
 
Posts: 259
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2016 3:03 am

Re: Discussions Pertaining to Q

Unread postby MrSinclair on Tue Nov 13, 2018 3:49 am

I was on a Q related site recently and was pleasantly surprised to see many people experiencing a new awareness of "phony fake shows" and crisis actors/ This was regarding the absurd Thousand Oaks/Boarderline Shooting.

These were people who had not previously understood fake shootings before, at most considering them to be some kind of "false flag" now accepting at least that shooting as fake. Qanon , in my limited awareness, has not mentioned fake shooting and crisis actors but were he/she/they to do so it would have a big impact as most or certainly many Q followers are Q believers. All this "trust the plan" talk is used to keep people who aren't thinking critically believing they are doing exactly that.

The Q world is reaching a critical juncture. Trumps majority in the Senate is under threat of being stolen from him with the endless new votes being discovered in Florida, Georgia and elsewhere. Already today the Senate seat won by his party in Arizona was flipped back to the democrat party after additional votes turned up. Q has claimed that Trump had anticipated voter fraud and laid a trap to expose and prosecute it. Q followers are restless for action and if these seat flips continue to occur and are conceded to as in Arizona, you can then expect a revolt or mass defection among the true believers.

One other major element of the Q world is the belief that JFK Jr did not die in the plane crash 20 years ago and has been secretly sheltered by his friend Donald Trump. A man named Vincent Fusca who appears at Trump rallies in the VIP seating area is widely believed to be JFK Jr by the Q crowd. He appears at those rallies often with two women believed to be his wife and sister-in-law who died with him in the plane crash. All three do bear at least some resemblance which makes it interesting. Q believers en masse are anticipating that on 11/22/18 some major revelation as to JFK Jr's survival will be announced. This too is another critical juncture at which the Q world faces the loss of many believers if nothing happens.

If Trump loses his Senate majority and no JFK Jr announcement is made I believe that Q will lose its robust following and become mostly irrelevant to those who now live by its every pronouncement at Qanon.pub
MrSinclair
Member
 
Posts: 399
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 1:29 am

Re: Discussions Pertaining to Q

Unread postby VonCrowne on Tue Dec 11, 2018 4:59 am

Good Evening, All; or,
How I got to here from there:
I've never been much of a subscriber to the Q phenomenon;
To do so would indicate an actual belief in the 'American' system.
Trump, Obama... Sorry, No.
Let's start at the beginning.
I have been delving into the possibility of a Nazi/Zionist collaboration for the last couple of years;
I found a lot of good information, but, for these purposes, I start with:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Nasi
And, to my surprise, it linked to:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wu_Ming
"Wu Ming (extended name: Wu Ming Foundation) is a pseudonym for a group of Italian authors formed in 2000 from a subset of the Luther Blissett community in Bologna. Four of the group earlier wrote the novel Q (first edition 1999). Unlike the open name "Luther Blissett", "Wu Ming" stands for a defined group of writers active in literature and popular culture. The band authored several novels, some of which have been translated in many countries. "
Which linked to:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luther_Bl ... m_de_plume)
"Luther Blissett is a multiple-use name, an "open pop star" informally adopted and shared by hundreds of artists and activists all over Europe and the Americas since 1994. The pseudonym first appeared in Bologna, Italy, in mid-1994, when a number of cultural activists began using it for staging a series of urban and media pranks and to experiment with new forms of authorship and identity."
Which linked to:
Q is a novel by Luther Blissett first published in Italian in 1999. The novel is set in Europe during the 16th century, and deals with Protestant reformation movements.
"Luther Blissett" was a nom de plume for four Italian authors (Roberto Bui, Giovanni Cattabriga, Federico Guglielmi and Luca Di Meo) who were part of the "Luther Blissett Project", which ended in 1999. They now write under the name Wu Ming.
Which linked to:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QAnon
And, I'm done.
Q is BullShit. "Q"uit wasting your time and get about business.
VonCrowne
Member
 
Posts: 22
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2016 12:55 am

PreviousNext

Return to General World Affairs

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests