The number of posts which litter all aspects of the internet on the subject of Q (Qanon/Q-Anon/Q Anon/#qanon) is truly astounding… perhaps annoying would be a better word. It never ceases to amaze me how many people fall for this stuff; there sure are a lot of them who want to believe in Superman. I hate to be the one to break it to you all, but Superman does NOT exist.

It is important that people not lose their capacity for critical thinking, so let’s look at his (or her) modus operandi for a moment.

Q is anonymous.
Q is scattered and obscure.
Q speaks in short cryptic blurbs.
Q speaks about many topics.
Q does not provide answers, nor bombshells.
Q’s predictions never come to pass.
Q’s predictions always come to pass, depending on how they are interpreted.

Each of these elements should raise red flags on their own, and often do; but when put together, they serve as a blatant warning that you might be in the process of being duped.

Keeping one’s identity hidden is understandable when one is in a sensitive position or when one participates in whistle-blowing, however, it can also be used as a tool. The media, as can be seen in an innumerable series of articles, both on-line and in print, have recently taken to reporting on stories which are often found to be using a single anonymous source. Whenever they do, they are seen in a suspicious light, right off the bat, as they should be. People spend more time investigating the provenance of their collectibles than that of their informational resources. This is a dangerous habit and one which leads to dogmatic belief rather than informed knowledge.
Would a whistle-blower try to stay anonymous? Not many have. It defeats the purpose to a large extent. Would a dis/mis-information agent try to stay anonymous? Of course they would. Whistle-blowers who try to stay anonymous tend not to stay anonymous for very long. Some would say that anonymity is proof of sincerity since no profit is gained for the act of releasing confidential information. Well, some people crave attention, too. Upvotes, likes, and the ‘cred’ which follows can be tempting, as well. Eventually, those who have ulterior motives come into the light.

Another thing about whistle-blowers is that they usually release useful information. Their allegations tend to be clear and precise, and their statements tend to relate to a certain area of their own experience or expertise. Once they have ‘shot their bolt’ as it were, they don’t generally have much to add. Whistle-blowers tend to be modest and tend not to claim knowledge about everything, rather, they tend to focus quite deliberately on specific topics in order not to distract from the information they bring forth. By and large, they tend not to want to attract attention to themselves, instead, they very much want whatever attention they can garner to be shed on the information they make public. This is another reason they are very clear about the allegations they make.

Whistle-blowers also usually release all that they know and all at once, just in case they are discovered and possibly silenced after the initial release. You don’t want to be holding information after having painted a big bold target on your forehead because if you are caught, it might not get out. Those who share information understand that it is the information that is important, not the book deal, even if they do end up taking it. Another reason to release everything all at once is to mitigate the risk of being discovered. The more releases one makes, the more opportunities it presents for getting caught. Holding information is always a sign of eventual bribery, coercion, blackmail, or profit. Releasing damaging information in a very public way is the best defense against retribution.

The information released tends also to serve a purpose. The reasons are varied, but if the information is to help others, it must be comprehensible, it must be accurate, it must be valuable, and it must be timely. It must also be verifiable. Releasing the information must serve a purpose.

Certainly, the role of the whistle-blower is to make information available to the public. The public must be the focus (there are exceptions) but in this case, sharing information with the public which is indecipherable is of little use. If his code is for the intelligence community, why go through the internet? Releasing tidbits instead of dumping it all at once is a clear indication that Q is seeking a following and wants to ‘keep ’em coming back for more.’ The accuracy of his predictions depends only upon the interpretations of his followers and so cannot be verified.
Like an astrologer, if one keeps throwing stuff out there, eventually something will stick.

…made men believe they should find their fortunes, sometimes in the ambiguous or senslesse answers of the priests at Delphi, Delos, Ammon, and other famous Oracles; which answers, were made ambiguous by designe, to own the event both wayes.
-Thomas Hobbes

There are many whistle-blowers who have sacrificed their honour, their oaths, their fortunes, their happiness, their freedom, their families, and even their lives in search of truth. Q is none of these things. He is a false prophet who risks nothing, provides nothing, and seeks only to promote himself, his ideas, and his ego. After all, anyone claiming access to all the information he ‘provides’ should know that the internet is not the best place to be if one wants to remain anonymous, unless of course one has a team working to cover their tracks.

Julian Assange
William Binney
Richard M. Bowen III
Smedley Butler
Milton William Cooper

Sibel Edmonds
Daniel Ellsberg
Daphne Caruana Galizia
John Kiriakou
Sergei Magnitsky
Chelsea Manning
Clive Ponting
Michael Ruppert
Frank Serpico
Karen Silkwood
Edward Snowden
Linda Tripp
Mordechai Vanunu
Joseph Wilson

… are but a few of the brave whistle-blowers without whom the world would remain a much darker place.
A more complete list can be found here.

@Q: Labor Omnia Vincit – You’re more flying squirrel than you are Superman.


The Cremation Of Care Goes Dutch

The title of this article “Cremation Of Care” (9:41) comes from the name of the ceremony held at the Bohemian Grove every July where some of the most powerful people in the world come together for… well, for who knows what?! In front of a giant owl-god, Molech, the concept of care is burnt in effigy.

The image is of the Kindlifresser (child-eater) in the Swiss capitol of Bern, feasting on a sack full of children.

You will soon see how these two notions relate to the upcoming video.

Do you remember “Confessions Of An Economic Hit Man” (Part 1 – 53:35) in which John Perkins claims to have played a role in an alleged process of economic colonization of Third World countries?
Well, consider that the first chapter. This is the second chapter. It’s much worse.
(Original in Dutch, with English subtitles.)