I'll check. If that's the case then the point of Q's comments would have been the "catch and release" part, referencing the catch and release of the Saudi Prince. Just as amazing.

So now that the time stamps may not be what you thought, you just change the meaning around to fit whatever you need it to fit to make a miracle out of Q? Using that logic that world makes no sense in a hurry. I do not understand that sort of logic. Honestly it is painful to watch.

ME: You had also previously accepted the bogus claims of HighLevelInsider.

ESOTERICshade: I gave him hell all the time for trying to talk people into spying on rich and powerful people.

No, actually, I went through your comments in great detail here and showed that while you made a brief show of not trusting HLI, you agreed with him and he agreed with you the vast majority of the time. Remember? You get stoned and then you start dropping words from your sentences and forgetting what happened. You did implicitly disagree with him about going to the police, this one time. But you didn't specifically call him out for it. The strongest criticism you ever made of HLI was mocking him for his choice of camera.

Me: You didn't just "disagree" with me about WIC. You accepted his utterly bogus claims without any evidence

ESOTERICshade: ... it's not your problem what I think about WIC.

Sure it is, because while you were defending him, you were accusing me of being a shill. Go back and look. You accused me of being a shill for Paul Ryan, and a Satan-worshipping pedophile, long before I accused you of being a shill for David Brock. And you and WIC never offered any evidence against Paul Ryan, or any evidence of a big conspiracy in Racine. Nothing whatever, as I showed over and over.

ESOTERICshade: The crux of your whole fucking story was that Glenn Beck was going to blow the lid off pizza gate. I pointed out that Glenn Beck is a "carnival barker" and it pretty much burned your theory.

What you want to say is that since Beck has cried for the camera, since he has sometimes used theatrics to get his message out, this means that you know his entire June 12 whistleblower story is complete bullshit. You know that there was no whistleblower, and there was no "ally" who the whistleblower reached out to, and none of it happened. Right? Because Beck deliberately crying on-camera for effect--years before or after June 12, 2013--is completely irrelevant unless it PROVES that there was no whistleblower on June 12. Nobody gives a goddamn about Beck crying if there actually was a whistleblower.

So this is not actually an argument, it's just you claiming to have psychic powers. Try dealing with what actually happens on the video from that day instead.

ESOTERICshade: You also accused @think- and me of being the same person, along with about 15 other people in this forum. I don't know if you are a shill or just schizophrenic.

You keep complaining about this as if what I'm doing is unreasonable. I suppose there might be a few people who don't grasp this point, but most people do. David Brock has a guy who comes here every day to spread disinfo. He uses a bunch of sockpuppets to accomplish that goal. If Pizzagate is real, then these two points are also true. The existence of a guy working for Brock who uses sockpuppets on Voat is absolutely beyond question -- otherwise why the hell are we all here?

I showed that the guy controlling @HighLevelInsider and Senate Anon was also using @ababcb. He screwed up and forgot what information he provided using which sockpuppet, and I caught him. So having established that Brock's guy likes to pose as a phony "insider," I then went after another phony insider, @Wisconsin_Is_Corrupt. And you defended WIC, no matter how absurd WIC's claims got.

From the perspective of a reasonable person, I might be wrong about you specifically being a sockpuppet, but I'm neither a shill nor a schizophrenic. It's official /v/pizzagate doctrine, agreed to by all the mods, and the majority of members, that there are shills here working for Brock. The only question before us is whether you, @ESOTERICshade, are one of them. So quit acting like it's some kind of astonishing delusion on my part to look at the abundant evidence of you shilling.

Me: You're trying to salvage this particular sockpuppet so as to have at least one long-term ID to play around with that has a reputation for being skeptical.

ESOTERICshade: Utterly ridiculous. If I was Q I would not work so hard against myself. I might be the most ardent and sensible anti Q person in the forum and I do a good job of debunking Q. I would not do that if I was Q.

I'm sure some people have fallen for this argument (hi there @Vindicator), but it's not actually a very good one. The point of disinfo is to spread confusion, to prevent the real truth from being talked about. That doesn't require the person spreading disinfo to be consistent or even coherent. When @HighLevelInsider wrote long essays about the history of his secret society ("3"), and how it went all the way back to Plato, and how Kennedy was a member but got assassinated, it didn't matter that he frequently made no sense, or contradicted himself. It only mattered that he got people to waste time on his stories rather than digging into James Alefantis threatening Ryan O'Neal's life, or raping one of his employees.

Similarly, you oppose Q, but then you post mind-bogglingly obscure stuff like a 7-part series on Clive Davis and Satanism, or how maybe we didn't go to the moon, or the Kushners implanting 666 chips in everyone. And those are all just from TODAY. This is the sort of stuff that all the "insiders" have posted. You waste everyone's time speculating that "Lucent" has something or other to do with "Lucifer," and then you complain about me being completely irrelevant and delusional?

While we're discussing stuff that you consider irrelevant, would you care to express an opinion about the Milwaukee recount? Or about John Boehner? Can you explain how watching videos about Clive Davis is more relevant than evidence of Hillary Clinton committing an actual crime?

See, call me egotistical, but I think the fact that HLI and Senate Anon and WIC all stopped posting is evidence that my theory about the whistleblower is right. And I think the timing here is really interesting.

Let's think back to October 28, when you started doing Q. Funny coincidence: October 27 was Day 4 for me, when I had outed those three "insiders". The very next day, a new "insider" starts up, and he only posts on /pol/, not on Voat, so I can't catch him making humiliating errors with his sockpuppets. On Day 7, October 31, I reveal that the guy controlling all those "insider" sockpuppets is "Tory Smith," and I show everyone his face (your face). So amazingly, on November 1, Q begins what he describes as the biggest info drop in American history. He predicts riots, martial law, activation of the National Guard, Trump fleeing to a safe location, mass arrests. And he has kept up the LARP, day after day, relentlessly stirring up Trump supporters to the point where fricking InfoWars has headlines about Q Anon.

So yeah, I think that you're Q, and that you are frantically spreading every kind of confusion you can think of, to put off the day when my expose starts to get attention on social media.

(@Vindicator, look at the dates. Think about the sort of pressure that this guy was under. Think how scared he was, literally hours after I showed the world his face and voice.)

I really don't understand why ESO (or anyone who isn't in full favor of this Q thing) gets downvoated so fervently regarding his cynicism or skepticism of all of this. ESO is merely pointing out that the U.S. government (like most all govts.), and general elite population and their insiders (insiders such as Q, apparently, right?) are almost always compromised, well-paid and harshly threatened LIARS seeking to push their twisted agendas.

These grouplove Q threads shouldn't be so harsh to bash another's skepticism. We're all rooting for a big resolution, so healthy doses of skepticism towards those "insiders" is welcome and warranted, in my opinion. Then again, I'm just a lurker and binge reader in all of this, not a legitimate investigator, so what do I know? I only hope that the government doesn't get what they want for everybody: to conquer and divide us all- especially those of us who are redpilled. We need to stay indivisible and supportive even in conflicts of opinion. :/

I'll take the (easy) link, please.

Huh. Nice work. I had thought about it. I wondered if it was posible for a beam that fine to be reflected off the the surface of the moon. It would have to be very reflective though.

That is weird. It's like some messed up green screen. Honestly I don't know. Some things just seem too big of a technological challenge, even now like going to the moon and the ISS. I often wonder if the shuttle orbiting earth was one of the first real space launches in history, and the manned missions prior to that like the moon landings were in fact faked. At the time the US was competing with the soviets for technological supremacy. The Soviets even had their own plans to go to the moon with a craft of similar design to the Apollo Lunar Module, but they cancelled the launch.

Maybe neither nation could really go to the moon as it proved too difficult but NASA didnt want to admit it, and never did. Maybe they wanted to show up the Soviets to discourage them from trying to keep up with the US.

I think the unmanned missions and satellite launches are real, I just wonder how far away from Earth manned missions have really gone, if at all. But I don't understand why they are trying to fake the ISS missions, when it's supposed to be a joint effort between the Russians, USA, and European countries, the cold war is over so why do they want to deceive the public?

The fact they claim they lost that information makes me think it could be fake. I mean how do they lose something so important? Either it's fake or they're just really incompetent.