I think you “wiffed” on that “Q Interpretation”...think “they” are referring to the Strasbourg terror attack as a false flag. One of the biggest problems I have with “Q’s” credibility...just come out and tell us Mr. Insider....quit beating around the bush.

One of the biggest problems I have with “Q’s” credibility...just come out and tell us Mr. Insider....quit beating around the bush.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Your question answers itself.

If Q is really an insider (as we believe), he/they CANNOT just spill what they know because much of it is classified, including all conversations with POTUS, Pompeo etc.

That's why the communications are in the form of questions, hints, ambiguities and "coincidences" that preclude the possibilities of random chance.

Of course millions of us find the pursuit of these leads entertaining as well, which helps to build the sense of community (((WWG1WGA))) that is definitely part of the plan.

I think you “wiffed” on that “Q Interpretation”

a.) Its "whiffed".
b.) I'm not afraid to "whiff". I do it all the time. So does everybody else.

...think “they” are referring to the Strasbourg terror attack as a false flag.

Maybe. Maybe not. Some people have posted that. Thing is, just saying "false flag" isn't enough. Q says the purpose of the "event" is to "quell growing protests against (Macron/Frog Derp Government/EU)".

So this event, according to Q, was intended to "quell" the protests. Was it to divert attention? Was it to intimidate the protestors into going home? Was it to make the protests seem to be a part of or in some way causul (is that even a word?) to the terrorist act in some way?

I just don't like saying "false flag" without the attached meaning/purpose.

One of the biggest problems I have with “Q’s” credibility...just come out and tell us Mr. Insider....quit beating around the bush.

Read Q's recent posts regarding WHY he "beats around the bush" and the myriad past posts explaining EXACTLY THE SAME THING OVER AND OVER AGAIN.

After you do that, maybe you won't have such a problem?

Here's a partial from Q post #2567 (yesterday) to get the ball rolling. After that, you're on your own, goodman.

How do you 'safely' & 'securely' communicate through a backchannel w/ the public and bypass the FAKE NEWS MEDIA?
How do you 'safely' & 'securely' communicate w/o breaking the law and violating NAT SEC?
Q

Thank you for posting, patriot.

😊

Bagster