" what are you saying ??"
You still don't understand. Read my posts again. The following is something you missed earlier --- "Warfare is not fought in terms of time. It's based on constant reassessment of objectives." Hence, DateFagging is not on the list of objectives, is it? This ought to be a big clue to you. What war is ever fought with naming the date of an attack or advancing an objective? You won't find this lunacy in warfare. So, what makes anyone think the DateFags worked with 'Q'? It makes no sense at all. So, Cui bono? The Deep State is most definitely the party that benefits from the DateFaggots as I already mentioned.
Irregular warfare consists of PsyOP exploitation in the field of communication. If you didn't pick this up with the 'Q' posts, then you missed it there too. The encryptic communications (i.e. COMMS) were not posted on 8kun for 8kun readers. 8kun just happened to be the battle field (venue) that the PsyOp was being waged. Ask yourself why was 8kun chosen? The only element of those 'Q' posts meant for the 8kun readers and all its derivative readers, were the Patriotic Themes and Biblical verses. Each one of those 'Q' posts included encryption. Obviously, when something is encrypted, it is not meant for any else, but only the receiver that has the key for unlocking the code.
"Either there is a coterie of white hat / military operators that have been documenting the crimes and will arrest traitors to the republic, as the q-comms have repeatedly stated or there isnt??"
No where did I state there are "No White hats" or "Military" in my posts. You added this to the topic. Like I said before, only the Patriotic Themes and Biblical verses were meant for us lurkers. Everything else was PsyOP warfare. Consider this example: In warfare, if one want their adversary to react and make a move to learn more about their network, wouldn't you feed the enemy information causing them to overreact? And possibly make a mistake? The Intel from this would certainly help define the size and scope of the enemy. This is one example that was certainly going on with some of the 'Q' posts. Just posting information on Hillary Clinton that perhaps only her inner circle knew about would cause alarm, reaction, and perhaps miscalculation that could provide useful information on the scope of the network. The Deep State was certainly reading all the 'Q' posts and actively trying to figure them out. Was the 'Q' post true? Well, that is not nearly as important as the reaction the message caused. So, in this PsyOp example the 8kun lurkers are not the intended target, but merely the chaff or noise used as a distraction on the battlefield.
Why are you not willing to just cut to the chase and say what you think is going on when asked. All of your conversations are just varying degrees of swarmy 'Where did i say that - you misunderstand what i wrote' bla bla bla. But you never just actually clarify a straight question. Its seems like your continually obfuscating ... My overall question is simple - either one can believe there is a group working in the military and intelligence that will defend the republic from all traitors both foreign and domestic as the q-drops allude too, or theres not.Simple really. Do you think there are ??
And of course im gonna mention 'white hats and military' bc the whole topic is about 'warfare' and the 'deep state' -so you really wanna point out that im in error to bring up those two groups in relation to the overall topic ?? Jfc ...
EDIT: Oh you say 'No where did I state there are "No White hats" or "Military" in my posts. ' and call me out for adding that but in earlier posts in the past when i question whether there are white hats or not you also say 'i didnt mention there were white hats or military in my posts' as well , your just keep talking semantics and my queries aren't about date fags - thats all you, im asking what you believe and who it involves ?/ ....
It's useless to respond to you. I've answered your question at least 2 times. It's there in plain English. When one injects new issues (ergo, white hat, military) into the polemic, they've lost the context and are hoping to move it to new grounds. It's a desperate defense mechanism. Your wrong about warfare being just 'military' or 'white hats'. What is a 'White Hat' anyway? Why don't explain that to me, while I hold back laughter. It's another term without a real definition. If we talk about 'white hats', why not talk about the 'War on terror'. You can declare war on 'terror' while I declare war on 'laughter' and 'hate' and 'antipathy'.
So long, my communique has ended. 'Trust the plan' and while your at it-- 'Win one for the Gipper'.
See there we are, still skirting around the issue and now doesn't want to continue when pressed, You're so insecure of being wrong that you will type paragraphs out about 'warfare and psi-ops' and 'encrypted communications not being for the public' but is unwilling to openly say out loud what groups or people are involved when asked, so i can get an understanding on who you are talking about. Weird flex man.
edit: LMAO, wont actually say out loud who or what groups q refers too but wastes time asking what a 'white hat' is ....as if he doesnt know....
(post is archived)