To: JockoManning
“But the whole Q-Team strategy is to out sensitive stuff by having the anons search Socratic questions’ answers out themselves.”
That’s my favorite part of the whole thing! Q puts up gibberish, and other people make up what it means. What if they are wrong? Will Q correct them? If so, why doesn’t Q speak clearly in the first place?
Oh, but Q has to code things because, secrets or something. Which aren’t secrets because the anons tell us what Q means.
Good grief.
794 posted on 10/1/2018, 1:08:37 PM by SaxxonWoods
To: JockoManning
Here’s the problem. Q spends more time insisting we all “believe” than on anything else. Q sounds like Tinkerbell, who will disappear if no one believes. I think Q is accurate on that.
But, it this is all real, it doesn’t matter if we believe it or not.
Except when Q says it’s a huge battle for humanity, and “welcome to the police state”.
Q sounds much more like a Leftist disinformation scheme than whatever Q followers claim. I can’t figure out any purpose for Trump have Q. I can figure out reasons for Leftists or pranksters to have Q.
Q serves no purpose. Q followers were already Trumpists and still are, just like me. I don’t have to hang on every utterance of Q, All I have to do is follow open sources.
791 posted on 10/1/2018, 1:04:02 PM by SaxxonWoods
I think that Q-Team skepticism is slightly understandable. Yet misguided—by bias & askew assumptions and by lack of sufficient research.
The statistical probability of all the puzzle pieces from the Q-Team and Trump related thereto being merely random chance are incredibly well beyond chance to the absolute extreme. We are probably talking about 1 in more than there are atoms in the known universe for a fittingly large number.
Crap. Disregard my reply to you Bob, I thought you were the one posting trash to jocko. My apologies.