The MSM has been so worried about Q and the "anon" movement. Wonder why there has been so little attempts to identify who Q is? Wonder if many know, but don't want it revealed?
Can't believe all these "journalists" aren't curious.
Thoughts?
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (27)
sorted by:
The MSM largely feels like it has identified Q already.
Q's identity being proven as some high level government or military official(s) would be the absolute largest redpill you guys could possibly provide. I am sometimes surprised that there isn't a more concerted effort around here to provide that concrete, indisputable proof of who was typing those words, because I believe you can make or break this movement on Q's proven identity alone.
Between 'disinformation is necessary', 'game theory', and time deltas, absolutely any failure to predict an event can be excused. The first four sentences above are granting a complete 'pass' to any failure.
So you are quite comfortable accepting an argument that says, basically, 'When I'm right I'm right, and when I'm wrong, it's because 'disinformation is necessary' - so I'm always right!
In other words, I can say "we will invade China tomorrow at 9am ET". If it happens - boom - proof of my amazing knowledge. And if it doesn't happen, 'disinformation is necessary'. I mean, it's super cool because it means you can never be wrong, but it doesn't stand up to the most basic of analysis.