You go boy -- SLAY that straw man! Too bad that's not my argument, or anyone else's. Who in this thread said anything about America living happily ever after?
As a well-grounded Catholic raised in Tradition, I had the same thoughts myself. I wasn't inclined to believe in this Plan (in other words, I wasn't inclined to have hope) but:
1. God has seemed to be quite patient with us. The Chastisement is a long time coming. It could have happened years ago. In fact, WW3 has been literally postponed several times including quite recently. Most of us would soil ourselves if we knew how many times we were minutes away from global thermonuclear war and the end of all modern conveniences. All thanks to God's mercy in giving us more time. Which leads to my next point...
2. I'm not necessarily hoping for a SOLUTION -- just a RESPITE. The respite offered by Trump and the Q Patriots might be short -- a few years, a year, etc. But I'll take it!
Seriously, if you had the choice between WW3 on March 1, 2019 or WW3 on March 15, 2019 wouldn't you choose the latter? Don't give me that "what difference does it make" nonsense. I for one am not the type to despair, be passive, or sit there and do nothing. If all I can get is a week, then I'll take it!
3. Trump and the good guys could ultimately fail -- the Deep State could prevail after all, and then we're without hope of a human solution OR respite. Just sit and wait for the Chastisement at that point.
But even if Trump and his group fail, then I would still be "right" for purposes of this thread. The only discussion is the reality of the Plan or is it all a complicated game/ruse to trick even more people into a new 3 party system. (Trump has enemies among both Republicans and Democrats, keep in mind). Also
keep in mind that many in the Deep State have already resigned, been fired, or worse -- the downfall of McCain for example was quite curious. Was he executed?
Can you really call a person naive for buying in when their actions are so convincing -- damaging the Deep State in this case? If they're going to be so convincing, then I can't help but be deceived -- and even if it turned out that I was deceived, no one could ever claim I was being naive.
If a drug dealer hired a new underling, and that underling shot and killed 10 of the drug dealer's rivals, would the drug dealer ever be "naive" for trusting him even if it turned out later that the new underling was an undercover cop? I mean, this undercover cop just killed 10 of his rivals! Cops aren't supposed to behave that way. So the drug dealer might end up being deceived if the undercover agent was earnest enough (if he had a completely free hand to violate the law, for example), but no one could ever call him naive!
Of course a respite is to be preferred to an immediate chastisement.
If a drug dealer's underling claimed to have shot and killed 10 of the drug dealer's rivals, but there were no witnesses, no bodies, and the rivals' customers weren't looking for new connections, but the drug dealer believed the underling's claims nevertheless, might not the drug dealer be naive?
Topic: Mark my words - Ruth Bader Ginsburg is dead - truth will come out eventually (Read 20527 times)