-@TH3WH17ERABB17 -Q- Questions. White House Insider's postings -PART -8-

originally posted by: BringMeThanos

No comment on this from the usual posters in here??? You guys happy to just let this slide, surely this drop has a new meaning that you missed.

These Q Proofs are dropping like flies.

I'm not sure that what you have labeled as "proofs", is the final word on Q.

There's many different explanations, most of which have already been offered to you.

Why not enumerate them in a post, with a corresponding reply. That's what it takes to "prove" your point.

THE KEY OF THE LOCK = #### = THE GREAT AWAKENING


"It is He who reveals the profound and hidden things; He knows what is in the darkness, And the light dwells with Him." - Daniel 2:22

= THE SECRETS OF GOD =

THE LOCK OF JESUS
THE LOCK OF LUCIFER
THE LOCK OF THE KING
THE LOCK OF IHShVH
THE LOCK OF AEHIOUO
THE LOCK OF GEMATRIA
THE LOCK OF THE AKASHA
THE LOCK OF HEAVENS



THE KEY OF JESUS
THE KEY OF LUCIFER
THE KEY OF THE KING
THE KEY OF IHShVH
THE KEY OF AEHIOUO
THE KEY OF GEMATRIA
THE KEY OF THE AKASHA
THE KEY OF HEAVENS

originally posted by: 40CalTone
a reply to: BringMeThanos

Q Drop 1566 - Nov 19th
qanon.pub...

Hmmm, guess we know how he fakes images and avoids reverse google image search for his stock photos.

Hmmm, seems like you area liar. If you used the whole small clip from the Qdrop when making this overlay, you would have clearly seen that the next red stripe on the the flag CLEARLY does not match up.

Here is an overlay below of the WHOLE small clip from the drop over the "stock image" that BMT provided. CLEARLY not taken from the same picture.
Dont tell me that you did not try to use the whole small clip originally, then crop it to make it fit your narrative.. you are a liar.

I agree with your analysis. It's a similarly-composed picture, possibly even taken at the same photo shoot, but not the same image.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: IAMTAT

?? Like Superman???

Spoiler Alert, Silly lady:
Superman is not real.

Q IS real.

I see Trump hating MSNBC commentator Ed Schultz has died.

mobile.twitter.com...

He always reminded me of someone who would eventually blow a gasket. Maybe that's what happened.

a reply to: carewemust

He was only 64. Maybe he did.

originally posted by: carewemust
I see Trump hating MSNBC commentator Ed Schultz has died.

mobile.twitter.com...

He always reminded me of someone who would eventually blow a gasket. Maybe that's what happened.

I rather Liked Ed Schultz, he saw though the BS that was Washington. Sad to hear he passed on.

He seemed a decent person.

originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan
a reply to: carewemust

He was only 64. Maybe he did.

Ed Schultz was really bummed out because MSNBC fired him for supporting Bernie Sanders over Hillary Clinton.

freebeacon.com...

a reply to: queenofswords

QoS, this post about defining "fake" made me think...

Something can only be deemed "fake" if it purports to be something!

Take the apple/AF1 pic... it does not purport to be anything!
There is no text claiming anything with the picture?
We/anons/BMT may make assumptions that it implies Q in Marine 1 or AF1... but Q hasn't said that! There are plenty of pics where he/she has added text from which you could conclude an assertion but not this one.


If an artist painted that as a picture and just left the viewer to think about it, would it be a fake? No, it's just a piece of art that makes you think.

If an artist made art by taking that picture it still would only be art to make you think.

A lot of the attempted debunking here has depended on inferring something from what they define as an obvious assumption... doesn't stand up in a court of law.

a reply to: 40CalTone

Haha try harder. You fancy shrinking this even more?

originally posted by: RelSciHistItSufi
Take the apple/AF1 pic... it does not purport to be anything!
There is no text claiming anything with the picture?

There is in a following drop when he asks where one has to be to take a pic like that.

A lot of the attempted debunking here has depended on inferring something from what they define as an obvious assumption... doesn't stand up in a court of law.

This isn't a court of law.

a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

Oh yeah, its an original taken at the exact same second as this stock photo right? Just with a slightly different angle? /sarc

Warped and reflected. Its a match, just like the AF1 photo and I'm pretty sure the WhiteHouse EO photos will turn out the same. lol!

Court rules that Kim Dotcom can be extradited to the U.S.

Imo this has little to do with "copyright theft" and more to do with his knowledge of files related to Seth Rich and Julian Assange.

If it had anything to do with "copyright theft" there are hundreds of others that could be raided and extradited before him.

Ne w Armenian leader cracks down on Graft

(Armenia referenced by Q a few months ago).

originally posted by: RelSciHistItSufi
A lot of the attempted debunking here has depended on inferring something from what they define as an obvious assumption... doesn't stand up in a court of law.

Its not about court of law, its about whats more plausible.

Option 1) Anonymous internet user is taking photos inside the WH/AF1 and posting them on conspiracy websites with vague messages but can't take full photos or anything that would confirm they are real.

Option 2) Anonymous internet user is taking photos of warped stock images. Warping them before taking the photo, with a reflection and angle to try and avoid reverse google image search.

But but Q is the only explanation i've seen, if these two images weren't from Q but another anon with all the evidence I've posted in here you wouldn't hesitate for a second to realise they are fake/manipulated and not showing what the user is hinting. However your ability to think objectively/critically has been replaced by the Q hopes/dreams/fantasy and the desperation to cling onto this being a big thing.