Replies

"Why are you here, Rita?"

---------------------------------

I'm guessing that she took these statements seriously, as did I.
👇
The Great Awakening ('Freedom of Thought’), was designed and created not only as a backchannel to the public (away from the longstanding 'mind’ control of the corrupt & heavily biased media) to endure future events through transparency and regeneration of individual thought (breaking the chains of ‘group-think’), but, more importantly, aid in the construction of a vehicle (a ‘ship’) that provides the scattered (‘free thinkers’) with a ‘starter’ new social-networking platform which allows for freedom of thought, expression, and patriotism or national pride (the feeling of love, devotion and sense of attachment to a homeland and alliance with other citizens who share the same sentiment).

I think WE ARE HERE. When did certain members of this group become so authoritarian and determined to control the narrative?
👇
When ‘non-dogmatic’ information becomes FREE & TRANSPARENT it becomes a threat to those who attempt to control the narrative and/or the stable.

When you are awake, you stand on the outside of the stable (‘group-think’ collective), and have ‘free thought’.

"Free thought" is a philosophical viewpoint which holds that positions regarding truth should be formed on the basis of logic, reason, and empiricism, rather than authority, tradition, revelation, or dogma.

I read this to mean that we don't all have to think alike (group think), as long as we are all invested in the end goal. Apparently, Rita and I misread it because we want to think for ourselves. That is not compatible with the mindset going around that flames or criticizes HOW we think and WHAT we think if it doesn't parrot the "group think" of certain "cliches" in here.

I have every intention of supporting Q and President Trump, but I will do it MY way. And no, nobody is taking away my bee. ROTFL

I will never harass, flame, or tell anybody they are wrong for not believing the same way I do. I'm not so egotistical that I think I'm always right.

I will make up my own mind. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong, but I will exercise my right to be wrong.

The only demoralization I see lately is from certain people/groups demoralizing people that don't think in lockstep the same way they do.

IMO, the main thing that matters, that keeps us plugging for the same goal, is that it's OK to think as individuals, right or wrong. Where did the above mission statement go so wrong to the point that we aren't encouraged to think for ourselves without fear of being flamed?

Well, flame on!

👍 to you Rita! I, for one, appreciate your thoughts on all of it.

I really appreciate you for taking no personal offense, to especially anything I say. I’m one person.

There is a possibility that no one identifies with my mutterings. That’s okay. I am impossible to herd, but utterly harmless, except for the personal.

If someone did understand some part of my increasing dismay over this or that, why risk their trousers being set on fire, on a public forum, for saying so?

Generally, pile ons’ are much easier and guaranteed risk free.

So, I do thank you, very much.

The thought trolling needs to stop. I think I am breaking no rules of the road. I trust Admin to address FR rules.

I have no reason to think my 2 trollers are especially authorized to personally insult, troll, disrupt, feud, demand, or monitor my comments, inspecting for controversy they deem outside their version of acceptable.

So, thanks for your great address of another awkward moment. ❤

In the General/Chat forum, on a thread titled Q ~ Trust Trump's Plan ~ 11/20/2022 Vol.435, Q Day 1849, Tennessee Conservative wrote:
"Why are you here, Rita?"
---------------------------------
I'm guessing that she took these statements seriously, as did I.
👇
The Great Awakening ('Freedom of Thought’), was designed and created not only as a backchannel to the public (away from the longstanding 'mind’ control of the corrupt & heavily biased media) to endure future events through transparency and regeneration of individual thought (breaking the chains of ‘group-think’), but, more importantly, aid in the construction of a vehicle (a ‘ship’) that provides the scattered (‘free thinkers’) with a ‘starter’ new social-networking platform which allows for freedom of thought, expression, and patriotism or national pride (the feeling of love, devotion and sense of attachment to a homeland and alliance with other citizens who share the same sentiment).
I think WE ARE HERE. When did certain members of this group become so authoritarian and determined to control the narrative?
👇
When ‘non-dogmatic’ information becomes FREE & TRANSPARENT it becomes a threat to those who attempt to control the narrative and/or the stable.
When you are awake, you stand on the outside of the stable (‘group-think’ collective), and have ‘free thought’.
"Free thought" is a philosophical viewpoint which holds that positions regarding truth should be formed on the basis of logic, reason, and empiricism, rather than authority, tradition, revelation, or dogma.
I read this to mean that we don't all have to think alike (group think), as long as we are all invested in the end goal. Apparently, Rita and I misread it because we want to think for ourselves. That is not compatible with the mindset going around that flames or criticizes HOW we think and WHAT we think if it doesn't parrot the "group think" of certain "cliches" in here.
I have every intention of supporting Q and President Trump, but I will do it MY way. And no, nobody is taking away my bee. ROTFL
I will never harass, flame, or tell anybody they are wrong for not believing the same way I do. I'm not so egotistical that I think I'm always right.
I will make up my own mind. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong, but I will exercise my right to be wrong.
The only demoralization I see lately is from certain people/groups demoralizing people that don't think in lockstep the same way they do.
IMO, the main thing that matters, that keeps us plugging for the same goal, is that it's OK to think as individuals, right or wrong. Where did the above mission statement go so wrong to the point that we aren't encouraged to think for ourselves without fear of being flamed?
Well, flame on!
👍 to you Rita! I, for one, appreciate your thoughts on all of it.
Tennessee Conservative,
I created some confusion by combining my rejection of more criticism from Rita, which sounded like Version2.0 of her prior post ridiculing Q thread peeps, with opinion info that I would ordinarily post to anyone, anywhere as we do when we normally disagree.
I apologize for contributing noise - this combined posting wherein I add multiple topics together seems efficient at the time, but either creates a beastly long post or in this case, adds noise and distress by making it seem that I try to provide the sole interpretation of drops.
I continue to reject Rita's posts which we have to do as she believes best or else we are worthy of ridicule.
"We’re fat, fed and warm, sacrificing nothing for their cause, mostly preening about our brilliance, the substacks we prefer, and what we think we “know”. 🧐
(Self included.)"
My question, "Why are you here, Rita? Shouldn't you stay off the Q threads in order to help the Brazilians?" is pointing out that if those who remain on the thread are mere 'lazy people unwilling to lumber down to volunteer' (her prior post) or the '"...fat, fed, and warm, sacrificing nothing" etc., then why would she stay here? I don't believe anyone would stay here if they believed that of us; if I'm wrong I'd like to know the reason.
It is demoralizing to describe us as unworthy and selfish even while we are contributing, caring, sacrificing and serving. We don't deserve criticism for serving as we feel called instead of doing as she says, focusing on Brazil or the town square the way she deems best.
For her assertions to be true of us, there would have to be no information war worth fighting. Well we've been attacked far and wide by others who say there is no Q, there is no information war, we're just anesthetized (e.g., fat fed and warm...).
Whether or not the 'townsquare" tactic would bring about good results is the content I should have put in a separate opinon post, like any other debate or discussion/ideas about posts.
While I cannot remove concerns about my post, I did want to at least clarify my intentions.