Reblogged since this question keeps arising: “Is QAnon the MOST successful psyop EVER?”
“One of the first things that turned me off about Q is that I do not prefer to spend my time researching what is happening ‘out there’. The real change out there should be a reflection of what is happening ‘within’, and I am a huge proponent of doing my own work to shift my vibrational frequency rather than being distracted by ‘look over there’. Second, I prefer to communicate with clear cut, precise words that completely convey what I am trying to say and that convey what I need to know, and I don’t have the time or patience to decode and guess, or to play anonymous games.”
I have never been drawn to follow the white hat posts from “QAnon”. I have associates who continue to share Q’s posts but I haven’t paid much attention to it. I looked deep into why I was feeling this way and I couldn’t quite put my finger on it until I watched a video from from Aurora that explained the intention behind the current QAnon movement.
One of the first things that turned me off about Q is that I do not prefer to spend my time researching what is happening “out there”. The real change out there should be a reflection of what is happening “within”, and I am a huge proponent of doing my own work to shift my vibrational frequency rather than being distracted by “look over there”. Second, I prefer to communicate with clear cut, precise words that completely convey what I am trying to say and that convey what I need to know, and I don’t have the time or patience to decode and guess, or to play anonymous games.
I resonate with Aurora, a walk in Starseed, and here is what she says about Q:
—When Q Anon started making posts in November/December 2017, she feels like it was a different entity than what we are seeing today.
—She says that it first started out as a military intelligence insider, but that it grew to group of people connected through quantum encryption.
—At first, the Q posts were showing the promise of a collective move toward exposing things like America’s corrupt government and child sex trafficking and cannibalism.
—There was a focus of POTUS making America great again. However Aurora feels the Q posts have not been the same since January of 2018 and is on its second or third incarnation.
—Q is a composite of many people logging in on many different devices and making comments and then responding in real time.
—For many people to be logged in and to respond in real time with accurate information, it would need to be on a platform that is encrypted beyond any technology that can be hacked that would need to be on a quantum level that would probably tied to the use of artificial intelligence.
At this point the whole QAnon project has been hijacked and subverted according to Aurora. The big red flag was when Q stated repeatedly “Just Trust”. Just trust Trump, Sessions, etc. and trust “the plan”. In her opinion and observation when you say to someone “just trust me”, it’s like saying “F- you”.
Aurora feels like the Q project has turned into a pacifier for those who would normally storm the castle and demand justice. Now the Q posts encourage that the rectification of exposure to the corruption will take time and you should be patient and trust that it is all being taken care of. Her observation is that the promised exposure seems to be dragging on without much solid proof of change.
“The Q information keeps everybody strapped into in their child highchair with mommy and daddy and they feed you carrots and peas and then you just sit there waiting for more carrots and peas.”
Well at least that’s a good way to get your vegetables.
Big change requires humanity storming the castle with pitchforks and torches, and instead we are being told just to trust Big Daddy and Big Brother. Aurora encourages people to think for themselves, be skeptical, and don’t just believe the party line. On top of that, there are now people who claim to now be an expert decoders of Q, which skews the information to another level. I feel like it’s good advice to not give your energy to these people and distractions, and instead work on your own inner journey.
The bottom line is that Q has become another saviorship model, when the work we should be doing to save ourselves includes activating our merkaba energy field, healing our physical bodies, re-integrating the pieces and parts of us to make us whole again. This restores the organic DNA template, and that’s how peaceful, non compliant warriors of light get the job done.
The marathon we are running is a marathon of consciousness towards total freedom. Where Q may have started as a supporter running next to you in your own marathon, it has morphed into an apathetic spoon fed hysteria of popular puzzles and game decoders. It shouldn’t take many years to drain the swamp. In South Korea, they quickly indicted their corrupted and cult influenced leader who now sits in jail.
Most of us have realized that we do not have to expend large amounts of energy to convert other people to our way of thinking. Instead, the inner work will change our outer reality and the collective consciousness. The magic and alchemy is just waiting for us to utilize it.
Link to full article with video: http://howtoexitthematrix.com/2018/04/29/is-q-anon-a-fraud/
Hey people. Guess what. The only way you will ever change anything is by changing yourself. If something in the world makes you so angry that you cannot let it go and you are compelled to attack your fellow man, you are following directly along with the programming.
Division is the name of the game right now, on all levels.
When we activate the bioelectric flow, it is not the blockage or the darkness that we focus on. What we focus on is creating such a clean, open flow that it begins to radiate with pure light. Then, we bring that into the darkness and it is forced to transmute into what we wish to experience. It cannot even resist, this is universal law.
As above, so below.
When you focus on what you want to experience, instead of what you do not, you create a field that attracts that same energy into your life.
Right now, I see humanity once again dancing to the puppet masters’ strings.
Look inside at what you are feeling. Is it wholesome? Is it kind? Is it for the benefit of all, not just your group?
It is not about me or you, it is about us. We. Every single last one of us.
Humanity. We are approaching the eye of the needle. Do you really want to take this baggage through? Because it won’t fit and we are going regardless of your comfort level.
Everyone keeps wishing their family and friends would just “wake up”… what kind of example are you creating? God is inside of all of us and it is about damn time we started to honor the God in all life, not just what you deem worthy.
Most of this post is directed at the MAGA hat wearing kids being drummed at and the absolute uproar that followed, but the general alignment of FB today is on this same divisive path.
1. Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil. Regardless of what you know, don’t discuss it — especially if you are a public figure, news anchor, etc. If it’s not reported, it didn’t happen, and you never have to deal with the issues.
2. Become incredulous and indignant. Avoid discussing key issues and instead focus on side issues which can be used show the topic as being critical of some otherwise sacrosanct group or theme. This is also known as the “How dare you!” gambit.
3. Create rumor mongers. Avoid discussing issues by describing all charges, regardless of venue or evidence, as mere rumors and wild accusations. Other derogatory terms mutually exclusive of truth may work as well. This method works especially well with a silent press, because the only way the public can learn of the facts are through such “arguable rumors.” If you can associate the material with the Internet, use this fact to certify it a “wild rumor” which can have no basis in fact.
4. Use a straw man. Find or create a seeming element of your opponent’s argument which you can easily knock down to make yourself look good and the opponent to look bad. Either make up an issue you may safely imply exists based on your interpretation of the opponent/opponent arguments/situation, or select the weakest aspect of the weakest charges. Amplify their significance and destroy them in a way which appears to debunk all the charges, real and fabricated alike, while actually avoiding discussion of the real issues.5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule. This is also known as the primary attack the messenger ploy, though other methods qualify as variants of that approach. Associate opponents with unpopular titles such as “kooks”, “right-wing”, “liberal”, “left-wing”, “terrorists”, “conspiracy buffs”, “radicals”, “militia”, “racists”, “religious fanatics”, “sexual deviants”, and so forth. This makes others shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same label, and you avoid dealing with issues.
6. Hit and Run. In any public forum, make a brief attack of your opponent or the opponent position and then scamper off before an answer can be fielded, or simply ignore any answer. This works extremely well in Internet and letters-to-the-editor environments where a steady stream of new identities can be called upon without having to explain critical reasoning — simply make an accusation or other attack, never discussing issues, and never answering any subsequent response, for that would dignify the opponent’s viewpoint.
7. Question motives. Twist or amplify any fact which could be taken to imply that the opponent operates out of a hidden personal agenda or other bias. This avoids discussing issues and forces the accuser on the defensive.
8. Invoke authority. Claim for yourself or associate yourself with authority and present your argument with enough “jargon” and “minutiae” to illustrate you are “one who knows,” and simply say it isn’t so without discussing issues or demonstrating concretely why or citing sources.
9. Play Dumb. No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid discussing issues with denial they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect.
10. Associate opponent charges with old news. A derivative of the straw man usually, in any large-scale matter of high visibility, someone will make charges early on which can be or were already easily dealt with. Where it can be foreseen, have your own side raise a straw man issue and have it dealt with early on as part of the initial contingency plans. Subsequent charges, regardless of validity or new ground uncovered, can usually then be associated with the original charge and dismissed as simply being a rehash without need to address current issues — so much the better where the opponent is or was involved with the original source.
11. Establish and rely upon fall-back positions. Using a minor matter or element of the facts, take the “high road” and “confess” with candor that some innocent mistake, in hindsight, was made — but that opponents have seized on the opportunity to blow it all out of proportion and imply greater criminality which, “just isn’t so.” Others can reinforce this on your behalf, later. Done properly, this can garner sympathy and respect for “coming clean” and “owning up” to your mistakes without addressing more serious issues.
12. Enigmas that have no solution. Drawing upon the overall umbrella of events surrounding the crime and the multitude of players and events, paint the entire affair as too complex to solve. This causes those otherwise following the matter to begin to lose interest more quickly without having to address the actual issues.
13. Alice in Wonderland Logic. Avoid discussion of the issues by reasoning backwards with an apparent deductive logic in a way that forbears any actual material fact.
14. Demand complete solutions. Avoid the issues by requiring opponents to solve the crime at hand completely, a ploy which works best for items qualifying for rule 10.
15. Fit the facts to alternate conclusions. This requires creative thinking unless the crime was planned with contingency conclusions in place.
16. Vanishing evidence and witnesses. If it does not exist, it is not fact, and you won’t have to address the issue.
17. Change the subject. Usually in connection with one of the other ploys listed here, find a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or controversial comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more manageable topic. This works especially well with companions who can “argue” with you over the new topic and polarize the discussion arena in order to avoid discussing more key issues.
18. Emotionalize, antagonize, and goad opponents. If you can’t do anything else, chide and taunt your opponents and draw them into emotional responses which will tend to make them look foolish and overly motivated, and generally render their material somewhat less coherent. Not only will you avoid discussing the issues in the first instance, but even if their emotional response addresses the issue, you can further avoid the issues by then focusing on how “sensitive they are to criticism.”
19. Ignore proof presented, demand impossible proofs. This is perhaps a variant of the “play dumb” rule. Regardless of what material may be presented by an opponent in public forums, claim the material irrelevant and demand proof that is impossible for the opponent to come by (it may exist, but not be at his disposal, or it may be something which is known to be safely destroyed or withheld, such as a murder weapon). In order to completely avoid discussing issues may require you to categorically deny and be critical of media or books as valid sources, deny that witnesses are acceptable, or even deny that statements made by government or other authorities have any meaning or relevance.
20. False evidence. Whenever possible, introduce new facts or clues designed and manufactured to conflict with opponent presentations as useful tools to neutralize sensitive issues or impede resolution. This works best when the crime was designed with contingencies for the purpose, and the facts cannot be easily separated from the fabrications.
21. Call a Grand Jury, Special Prosecutor, or other empowered investigative body. Subvert the (process) to your benefit and effectively neutralize all sensitive issues without open discussion. Once convened, the evidence and testimony are required to be secret when properly handled. For instance, if you own the prosecuting attorney, it can ensure a Grand Jury hears no useful evidence and that the evidence is sealed an unavailable to subsequent investigators. Once a favorable verdict (usually, this technique is applied to find the guilty innocent, but it can also be used to obtain charges when seeking to frame a victim) is achieved, the matter can be considered officially closed.
22. Manufacture a new truth. Create your own expert(s), group(s), author(s), leader(s) or influence existing ones willing to forge new ground via scientific, investigative, or social research or testimony which concludes favorably. In this way, if you must actually address issues, you can do so authoritatively.
23. Create bigger distractions. If the above does not seem to be working to distract from sensitive issues, or to prevent unwanted media coverage of unstoppable events such as trials, create bigger news stories (or treat them as such) to distract the multitudes.
24. Silence critics. If the above methods do not prevail, consider removing opponents from circulation by some definitive solution so that the need to address issues is removed entirely. This can be by their death, arrest and detention, blackmail or destruction of their character by release of blackmail information, or merely by proper intimidation with blackmail or other threats.
25. Vanish. If you are a key holder of secrets or otherwise overly illuminated and you think the heat is getting too hot, to avoid the issues, vacate the kitchen.