RE: QAnon PsyOp Now Being Ripped Apart After Being Used to Discredit The Truth Community....(It Always Had the Vibe of CIA To It)
There are plenty of people that support Trump that didn't buy into the QAnon phenomena. There is a false assumption here that QAnon support and Trump support are the same thing. That is not the case. There is indeed a number of people that support Trump that also bought into QAnon. If you were to do a Venn diagram I suspect that pretty much all QAnon supporters/believers/followers were also Trump supporters, yet there would be a far larger amount of people outside of that overlap that don't buy into QAnon. I know a number of people bought into it early on and then some things changed and they no longer did. There are allegations that QAnon was hijacked many months ago. Compelling allegations. That is when a lot of people stopped supporting them.
I didn't vote for Trump. I actually don't think he is at all like Obama. He has been under unprecedented attack. I do think he has been used as a tool by the same people though. He is surrounded by them. He has acted upon false and bad intel. Example: The strikes against Syria over bogus/false flag gas attack nonsense. Or the skripal Novacek gas nonsense where no one died. He is only human, and he is surrounded by exactly the people that you are hinting at. He'd have to be super human to know when info is false or true. He has often placed his trust in the wrong parties. He still does. I truly don't think anyone could truly operate free of this corruption in the office now.
Though if it is a psyop then with the unprecedented and incredibly biased attacks against him (Obama isn't remotely in the same ballpark in this regard, he had tons of support rather than attacks, he still does) then if he was intended to be in there their agenda clearly must be to collapse trust in everything and increase division. If that is their goal it is working.
I've always thought that he was popular with them because they thought no one in their right mind would vote for someone who talks like him, thus why they put so much emphasis on "grab them by the pussy" and such. It'd scare people into voting for the incredibly corrupt Hillary.
Thus, the mental break down and insanity that ensued immediately after he won. I don't see indications that was the plan at all.
Though he is surrounded by people that are definitely manipulating him. Thus with the false intel and manipulation he is often being the puppet. I don't believe that was the plan in this case.
I haven't liked how he has handled Syria and a number of other things, but at the same time I've been very impressed with what he has actually managed to do given the insane never before seen set of circumstances that the last two years have been.
Though I personally am one of those that never bought into the whole QAnon thing. I often viewed it a lot like Astrology, or Tarot cards. Throw enough possibilities out there and let the people interpret it how they want. It lends the idea of prophecy and knowledge when really it was casting a lot of vague data that could be easily interpreted as being some genius insight when some of the bait managed to fit a mental narrative.
I also am aware that the craziness of the day is happening all over the world at the moment, so it is not just a Trump thing. Though that is what the propaganda clearly wants us to focus on.
Who controls the propaganda?
Not Trump.
Who is censoring?
Not Trump.
Fair points; the main one that I would like to address is the Syria attack.
This one PROVES Q as a legitimate intel source.
So, Trump announces the plan to withdraw; the next day the chemical attack, and the Q post about Trump never telegraphing moves.
After the attack, Britain and France threatened to attack with or without Trump. The attempt being to force NATO into conflict with Russia, this would legally force Trump into military action.
Meaning, Trump was forced into action or he would be forced into potential WW3 level military action.
So, he tweets about smart missiles, russia withdraws from the impact area, and most missiles got shot down.
The next day is where it became clear that it was a double cross;
It was such a massive move that even the media didn't even call for Trumps impeachment for 2 days after. They were so taken aback by how they got played that they didn't even know how to spin things....
No it doesn't. Also this occurred before Q was allegedly hijacked. A lot of people think Q was legit for awhile and then it was taken over by a different group. The problem with a secret group is it is totally possible this happened. It also might not have happened and we wouldn't know.
Q hasn't been so accurate with what has been going on in the last few weeks. Also my Tarot, and Astrology points stand. Throw enough darts that are vague and people will do the knitting of them into something that might make sense. It is a time tested technique.
I do think there seemed to be something to that initial group back during the time of the earlier Syria attacks. Though they haven't been nearly as accurate and a lot more vague. Often they have been completely wrong. They were not wrong that I saw before the alleged switching of controllers happened.
You know when Q was "hijacked"?? Coincidentally it happened RIGHT AFTER Q posted about being careful who to follow, that people were seeking profit from the movement.
The response to that post by Corsi, Jones, and a few others was to start claiming that Q was hijacked, Jones went so far as to claim he had "met Q" (No outside comms) and then that he had his "own Real Q" (Zach).
The Q group had obviously anticipated the attacks because they posted another photo from AF1 in the air that was taken seconds after one that was posted months earlier.
The point was never about being "accurate"...It is a group hinting at the elements of a general plan, NOT a specific iteration of what moves will be played and in what order. If they did that, then it would just be a matter of solving the clues and they could completely destroy the plan.
There was no "second group"... that was something started by people who outed themselves as profiteers.
Keep in mind not everyone around the president is a good actor. Showing such a photo is not evidence for or against the alleged hijacking of the Q movement. As I said before that is one of the problems with being completely anonymous. We literally cannot know.
I'm not much of a "faith" type person.
EDIT: Also I wasn't ignoring you. I flew out of country for a few days and only got back last night.
Agreed... Trump, especially from the start, has had a large segment of bad actors around him.
I think your point of anonymity is valid, makes it so there's no way to confirm or deny with 100%.
The main point I was making was that the people who claimed Q group was taken over or whatever, are those people who have been pointed at by Q as being paytriots, people who were trying to profit off the movement.
The problem here is that is a generalization. Those are not the only people saying that. Making categorical assumptions about a group of people based upon the traits of a few or even a lot of the members is generally false. Aka a Generalization, a stereotype is a form of that.
I push back, because I know the vast majority of generalizations are false.
I stated it generally, yes.
It is not a generalization though; those who were called out, they weren't called out by name, they were called out generally and exposed themselves by speaking out against it.
The prime examples are Alex Jones and Jerome Corsi.
Alex Jones hasn't stated definitively anything. Jerome Corsi did. Infowars has been rather non-commital when it comes to Q and they are not anonymous. As humans I don't agree with a lot of approaches of Alex Jones. Yet I trust him a hell of a lot more than I trust Q.
I don't think they exposed shit. ;) Think about this. Q is allowed without any censorship to speak on platforms all over the place. Some of the places that censor Alex Jones and others at Infowars like David Knight (whom I respect a lot) not only don't censor Q. At times they almost advertise for Q. shrug Read into it what you will.
If they were not anonymous they certainly would be in more danger, but I also would be able to consider motivations and other factors which we cannot know. So I disagree strongly with you on some of this.
I will admit that Q can definitely provoke my curiosity, yet a lot of what they say is stated in a way that seems leading like a tarot card reader and using a lot of already known things. So I'm not really impressed. I am more impressed with how hard the community will work to try to ascribe specific meaning to the little crumbs and snippets that Q releases.
Also, as of late they haven't been very accurate.