Posted on 06/11/2018 12:11:22 AM PDT by ransomnote
Does a false swatting count as a FF?
UPDATE: ALL CLEARPolice Respond to Report of Active Shooter at the Justice Department; DOJ Swatted?
two new ones pics of Julian Assange and Seth Rich
What recent news came out re: SR/JA/WL lawsuit?
Back in the news.
The ‘server’ brings down the house.
Q
Weasel words.
UK/SIS
WH/C_A/FBI/DOJ
Joint-Treason.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
This makes it sound like there is also treason against the U.K.
What could that be about?
We got rid of our traitor in the WH; but, the U.K. is still suffering from its globalist occupation.
Could this be about the Obama WH/CIA/5-Eyes conspiring against BREXIT?
Wasnt the drop implication that it was the week in general?
Woa...
Proof that Q reads this thread. He's talking directly to YOU, Jack Black.
Q sees all.
Bagster
> Hitler/Merkel
The resemblance is pretty startling.
I may have figured something out with respect to the NK deal.
NK was selling nukes to keep the doors open. He was even willing to sell them to the US to keep them out of people’s hands.
What if China was told that economic expansion into the NK would be exclusively Chinese - pauses the wage pressure they are seeing in China of late (capacity too!)
NK would work at what would previously had been Chinese level wages for ten years or so whilst their economy came online. They remain an economic and defense client of China, but would spend zero in terms of upkeep and defense. NK would be a Chinese authored economic miracle.
Q
This would apply to the twitter douche who posted this the other night and removed their account:
BackChannel17:
“HOSTAGE NO MORE. It Is Time To Exit The Rabbit Hole. It Has Been A Pleasure. Look forward to your news today(tomorrow stateside). I WILL be there. Truth Rises, and Wonderland Falls. 6/11 JA “
I consider that a high probability for Cobain and Hutchins too...
And, that's unfortunate because I do say enough controversial here, on my own, to already have irritated some people, though that is not my intention.
But it's not OK to ascribe everything that anyone says that you perceive as "anti Q" to me.
So, I will try again and make it crystal clear for you.
The following post is by SkyPilot, not me. I responded to it saying, that I was not aware of anything happening today, but the OIG report (due Thursday) should be fun. Here is SKYPILOT's original post: #322.
It is 3:00 pm EST. What was the earth shattering release that we were told would happen today (6\11)? Spaceshot says it was so big he was going to take today off from work and watch the news.I havent seen anything on Drudge (other than Singapore summit, which is not earth shattering.)
Some one please help me out here.
322 posted on 6/11/2018, 12:00:43 PM by SkyPilot
Separate question: How do you authenticate Q postings?
Hopefully you can understand that a simple blot of text like:
When did we mention/emphasize the 11th?..isn't self verifying. Anyone can sign something Q.
Those with an agenda to discredit are pushing false information.
They (you) will fail.
Learn.
Use logic.
Q
This is one reason I always use the term "Q and his interpreters". Because Q speaks mostly with his famous "Socratic questions" method, and occasional jpegs. So to get what it means lots of interpretation is needed. (I have noticed he's slightly less enigmatic than he used to be.
And it's also assuming you feel you can somehow authenticate him as the "True Q", an anonymous poster who has moved from chat board to chat board, all of which are primarily designed to facilitate anonymous chat.
And, as with anything humans interpret, interpretations are different.
I don't think that SkyPilot told us where he heard that, or the intepretation of that. But I take him at his word, and the Q quote you include indicates it was a widespread belief, so widespread that Q apparently felt the need to publicly respond to it.
But even our own resident Guru of Q, Bagster, seems to acknowledge that there was such a prediction. In post #454 he says (AND I QUOTE:)
p.p.p.s. Skypilot. I was always under the impression that 6-11 (the latest original IG release date) was what Q was pointing at as BOOM-worthy. That date has been changed. The only other thing of significance I've seen anybody saying might happen today was in regards to Assange.454 posted on 6/11/2018, 2:54:56 PM by bagster
So, apparently there was some expectation of something to do by a number of Q followers. Not by me, I didn't know about it. But by SkyPilot and Bagster, at least, but probably others. Including the person/poster that Q is dressing down in the unauthenticated message you included.
Maybe it was all a big misunderstanding, based on a false Q postings. Or maybe, as Bagster suggests that referred to the OIG report (although why Q would be telling us about the OIG report when the OIG does so himself is a mystery).
Feel free to respond to my actual postings anytime. I do have a lot of sincere questions.
I think it was an FFF - False false flag.
It took me a minute to figure out what the hell 23 was. It's right after the "NowC@mesTHEP@in-23!!!" from the graphic in the Q post dated 5-19-18.
I think it's meant to be a minus, but that's just my best guess. A date? Some type of countdown? Any military ideas?
It's a puzzlement.
Bagster
#1463
Anonymous ID: 17fc97 #1704039📁
Jun 11 2018 16:51:46 (EST)
seth_rich_cover.582cd87e07107.jpg
>>1704013
Q !CbboFOtcZs ID: 22318c #1704083📁
Jun 11 2018 16:53:30 (EST)
______________________________________________________
you’re wrong, I didn’t ignore that post i’m ignoring this post...
What is SING 12. I wanna say it's a day ahead in North Korea. Does SING somehow mean another part of the world in the day ahead time zone?
Bagster
LoL you asking me???? right now I am just trying to keep up with posting, barely had time to read everything yet, let alone see what the anons are sayin.
555
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.