Here Thar Be Monsters!

From the other side of the argument to the other side of the planet, read in over 149 countries and 17 languages. We bring you news and opinion with an IndoTex® flavor. Be sure to check out Radio Far Side. Send thoughts and comments to luap.jkt at gmail, and tell all your friends. Sampai jumpa, y'all.


Jonesing For Q

We want to express our sincerest thanks to Jeff Rense and his team for their invaluable support.  If this topic interests you, please keep an eye on the Rense Radio Network for exclusive content and updates as we ferret out the Q.

Previous posts:
Deep Throat v, Q
Q The Conspiracy - A Phenomenon
The Gospel According To Q
A-Marketing We Will Q
The Name Of The Q
Q The LARP Carp
Spe-Q-lating On Q
In The Twilight Of The Q

I've kept up with Alex Jones over the decades for the same reason many people watch auto racing - for the wrecks.

I have a collection of Jones' early documentaries and some of his early cablecasts because I collect underground media, as do a lot of folks in my business.  I've even crossed paths with him a few times.  If he can predict when and where a large number of media will show up, he will stick himself in the middle to get the free advertising.  Jones has turned free stuff into an empire.

In Texas many years ago, regulators passed laws requiring cable companies to provide some portion of their bandwidth to public access programming.  This usually manifested as an Access channel, where anyone who met the training criteria was allowed to use the facilities to produce 1/2-hour shows.  I used to teach production at the Access channel in Houston, so I know the system well, and one of my students then is the current mayor of Houston (Sylvester Turner).

Jones made ample use of this public gift, eventually branching into local radio, as well.  He began producing low-quality documentaries on various topics, such as the rise of the police state, 9/11, Bohemian Grove, and many others.  Over time, the videos got slicker just as folks started tuning in to his shortwave and "patriot network" shows for his wild-eyed rants and interviews that invariably turned into shouting matches (think Sasha Baron Cohen only serious).

The concept of Access channels morphed into YouTube, which became a global platform that allowed anyone to upload anything and eventually to capitalize on it.  As you can imagine, Jones was there almost instantly.  Not blaming him, understand.  Millions of us make use of the various free platforms out there to publish our work.  Few of us, however, rise to the size and complexity of Jones' operation.  One could even argue strongly that Jones helped sway the 2016 election to Trump by mobilizing his millions of followers, and that's when Jones' ego swelled to pathological proportions.

Jones was one of the first to recognize and capitalize on the Q Phenomenon.  He went so far as to claim that he had direct access to Q through a character called Zack, who was supposedly military intel stationed in Morocco (!) to protect his family from evil forces.

Jones also co-opted Jerome Corsi, a fairly well-known author and political insider with an intel background, and set him up as one of the first Q Decoders.  Subscriber numbers jumped and the Jones-Corsi team took an early lead in the Q Analysis world.

Until around May or June 2018.

At some point, without using names, Q made it clear that anyone claiming to have direct access to it was a liar, and anyone seeking to capitalize off of it was a slimeball no better than the MSM.  I paraphrase, but the intent is the same.  The Jones-Corsi team immediately crashed and burned, as this was widely interpreted to directly imply Jones' claims were false.

A couple of months passed, and the Jones-Corsi team rose again.  This time they claimed that Q had been taken over by evil forces inside the Abici (ABC - Q term for US federal agencies).  Jones-Corsi again asserted that only they had access to the true Q, and that the 8chan Q were "bad actors" out to usurp "the movement".

Then, in August 2018, Jones was suddenly and summarily wiped off the face of the internet by four of the Big Tech monsters in the same 12-hour period.  For someone like Jones, this is akin to throwing gasoline on a raging fire.  Jones now had access to an entirely new stream of folks who backed him solely on the grounds of protecting free speech.

Not that free speech is not a serious issue, especially in this case, and neither are the new folks streaming to Jones' remaining outlets wrong for backing him in this case.  It has many of the same elements as Larry Flynt's early battles, especially if we imagine that it was the printers who were silencing Hustler magazine.

Race car drivers know the risks, and watching them walk away from horrific crashes (threat of death) is what draws a significant part of the racing audience.

We cannot assume that the Big Tech companies, and CNN (which has been running a crusade against Jones) were ignorant of what they were doing.  Given the vast and frightening tools for modelling and predicting mass audiences, including q-analysis (see my article "The Name Of The Q"), allows them to precisely model the outcome of just about anything they say and do - but that is an article for a different time.

Suffice it to say that no one was caught by surprise by the swarm of new Jones fans, or the mass public outcry against this heinous censorship.  If you want to silence someone like Jones, you completely ignore him (see Ron Paul campaign in 2012).

So why would these masters of public perception make such a move?  Let's indulge in a little, as Dr. Joseph P. Farrell likes to call it, high-octane speculation.

Let's assume that Q and Trump are basically the same, and further that Q/Trump owe a bit of loyalty to Jones for his 2016 efforts.  Let's also assume that Q is what it claims to be - an entity with access to military-grade intel.  Further, based on past run-ins, we can assume that there is an adversarial relationship between Q and Alex Jones.

The scenario here is that Q wants to punish Jones for trying to usurp the Q Movement, while at the same time, not wanting to violate the debt of gratitude for assisting in the 2016 election.  Problem: how does one punish and reward at the same time with the same action?

Suppose Q, with all that military-grade intel, had some serious dirt on the heads of Big Tech companies.  It seems rather easy and obvious that one could leverage that information to coerce YouTube, Facebook, Spotify, and Apple to deplatform Jones in a coordinated move (all within 12 hours).

It is equally curious that outlets like Twitter and others DID NOT deplatform Jones, nor were all of Jones outlets on the banned platforms shut down, as if someone wanted to leave him some means to gather and hook new audiences, while at the same time send a clear message to cease and desist.

It's also very likely that the deplatforming was a gift to fire up a lawsuit, not unlike Larry Flynt's, that would lead to a (soon to be stacked) Supreme Court decision making tech corporations liable for things like free speech rights.

We must put on our 4-D thinking caps and realize that every good psy-op has muliple layers, with multiple agendas and multiple desired outcomes.  Just look at any well-crafted investigation of the JFK assassination.

For all four of the cited Big Techeries to act in unison within the same 12-hour period requires obvious coordination.  In a random or follow-on series, one might expect these events to happen organically over a few days, as one company takes the decision, and the others follow after examining the fall-out and whether it would be good for their PR efforts.

In this case, they acted together, as if having met and considered all aspects of the move before they executed the plan together.  Keep in mind that platforms like YouTube did not shutter all of Jones' channels, just the main ones bearing his name or the InfoWars brand.

This is such obvious collusion that it provides ample fodder for a lawsuit presumably heading for the Supreme Court - free speech, anti-trust, the list is boggling.

Hell, even the New York Times would be obliged to file an amicus curiae based on their Sullivan decision (1964), just as it did for Flynt.

Suppose Q, with multiple agendas, used some of its high-quality military-grade intel to basically blackmail the heads of Big Tech to deplatform Jones.  Just a flash of the cards to persuade is all that is needed.

This is not as far-fetched as it might seem.  Q wanted to punish Jones for capitalizing off the Q Phenomenon, something that was established a few months back.  At the same time, out of loyalty for the election help, Q chooses the exact kind of attack that would fuel Jones' empire, feeding both the free speech audience and the tin-foil hat audience directly to Jones' remaining outlets, as well as giving Jones a ripe trophy of being the highly visible target of a "conspiracy theory" and a heaping serving of lawsuit material.

There is no plausible way any of the parties - Big Tech, Q/Trump, Jones/Corsi) are ignorant of this scenario.  I'm just one hack with a laptop in the jungles of Indonesia, while they have unimaginable computer modelling capabilities at their fingertips.  If I can think of this, I know they did.

We can safely assume that all parties knew that deplatforming Jones would drive hordes to his defense.  We can assume that, as I have proved at length, Q is a psy-op capable of pulling off such a caper.  We can assume they all were well aware of the US v. Flynt decision.  And we can safely assume that all of them ran this plan through multiple modelscapes to find the most effective, least intensive route to achieve their ends.  And we can assume there are layers I haven't even begun to ponder yet.

Interestingly, Q's 8chan board came under supposed attack within days of the Jones Fiasco.  Ostensibly, some force (the Abici, according to Q itself) hacked its passwords and "trip codes," published them on the board, and added a manifesto of sorts pleading with folks to abandon Q, though it was hardly well crafted leading me to consider the following:

Humans are herd animals at their core.  When threatened, they will circle with men in an outer ring, women inside that, and children and vital supplies at the center.  We need only rehearse the common American idiom, "Circle the wagons."

Given this human propensity, it is easy to imagine using it to predictably model mass human behavior in various scenarios - and believe me they do, just think of how fear and threat are used constantly in media to motivate audiences to act in particular ways.  In fact, pretty much all media can be categorized as Fear, Mating and Food at their most basic levels.

Threaten Alex Jones and what happens?  The wagons circle around him - even those not in his wagon train.  Threaten Q and its supporters rally 'round, bringing even those who were not there to begin with.

"Do you mean Q hacked itself," the puzzled reader asks.  Yes, that's exactly what I mean.

Do you see the pattern here?  Problem -Reaction-Solution - the classic dialectic manipulating people's natural, instinctual proclivity to circle the wagons when threatened, whether the threat is real or perceived.  Think "Russian Threat," "North Korean nukes," "Amber Alerts," and even ads that invoke the fear of offending potential mates with one's body odor (see history of Mum deodorant).

Thus, with two seemingly unconnected events - the Jones and Q attacks - we have these results:

  • Q punishes Jones for not following the script (The Plan);
  • Q rewards Jones with more followers for loyalty in 2016;
  • Jones is handed ample fodder for a lawsuit and a friendly Supreme Court;
  • Q and Jones both gain credit for taking flak over "the target(s)";
  • Big Tech is put on notice of what dirt Q has on them and that their power is about to be trimmed.
Five clear and apparently opposing or unrelated goals with one well-timed and coordinated event.

It would seem that Alex Jones has been sent a message: stay out of Q Business; here's a juicy lawsuit to keep you busy that will provide a valuable service at the same time.  If Jones is smart, and we have no reason to assume otherwise, he will take the bait.

Ain't 4-D chess fun!  Oh, and don't forget that 4-D chess was popularized by the original Star Trek series - can you say Q Continuum?