Word NOW on the street with leftists is Ron Watkins is Q - they WERE saying it was Austin Steinbart. What changes?
🗣️ DISCUSSION 💬
They cannot find Q. Anywhere.
No arrest.
No charges.
No subpoena.
No back-trace.
No intelligence of who "Q" actually is.
No (successful) attempt to locate and "bring to justice" someone the Federal Government considers a cult leader.
Why not?
How Government handles an actual threat: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/un-sounds-alarm-over-extrajudicial-killings-in-the-talibans-afghanistan/ar-AAROisN?ocid=uxbndlbing
How Government handles a perceived threat: https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/10/politics/list-january-6-subpoenas/index.html
How Government handles an online troll: https://www.justice.gov/usao-az/pr/defendant-sentenced-online-threats
How Government handles Q: ... "Evil QAnon!!!"
Not just some autistic dweeb on 4chan, is it?
What I said is that evidence apparently exists. I don’t know the veracity of it because I don’t really care. I know he apparently wiggled his eyebrows on an HBO documentary or something, but I did not watch it, because… why would I? I don’t need a documentary to tell me about Q stuff.
This was in a discussion about why the government wouldn’t take action against a LARP. Watkins was a useful example of that. I wasn’t suggesting it was something I believed.
And I’m not infiltrating. Infiltrators hide. I have not. I have always been respectful here. Being a Q researcher isn’t the same thing as being a Q believer. Just like you can still research a vaccine that you believe is fake.
Research needs multiple perspectives. Otherwise, it’s theology.
Then you can count yourself as the exception to corporations that currently make a profit off of 'telling people about Q stuff' with their slant.
You hide most of your hostility to us. Thus, you walked through an open door, hiding your hostility, in a place where you ordinarily wouldn't be welcome, except for the fact that people (moderators) thought you cared about their perspective as anything other than a delusional curiosity to be studied (and then scoffed at on outside channels). Hence, infiltration. You know it's true, buddy.
Keyword being "here," and "always" is still incorrect- u/Zeitreise called you out pretty well, didn't he?
Do you think we have a problem with 'perspective,' when some of us are Jewish, while others would probably gas everyone who is Jewish if they had a chance? Anti-semitism is anti-Q btw, Nazis are the bad guy in Q Lore (in case you missed it). You must be ignoring the diversity of this movement if you think we're cookie-cutters that see #17 in everything and think that it's important.
What has your infiltration been for, anyway? It has been 238 days so far that you've had an account here, what could you possibly be learning about the people in this movement that you shouldn't already know? The one thing you could've learned - the driving force behind people that follow "Q" - is still lost on you. You still lump all of us in with the idiots saying they see "#17" everywhere, so what's the point of your perspective if that's your opinion of us? It's like the contribution of a sweat bee to a group of dogs - a minor annoyance that keeps landing on your paw.
We'll just wait and see what happens as far as "the storm" goes, but you're not really achieving anything here for yourself or others.
I think “the driving force of Q” is actually fairly complex, and different for different people. GAW is the largest public community of Q people, but certainly not the only one. Independent Facebook networks, work buddies, and church groups all have different ideas of what the Q movement is.
Which, I think, explains the JFK Jr people out in Dallas and other odd beliefs attached to “QAnon.” Without access to GAW, the Q-inspired belief that you can’t trust the media or authority or anything else opens up a lot of possible truths, and some communities apparently found truth that GAW mostly rejects.
I fully recognize that you can’t generalize a set of beliefs to any particular believer in Q. I can only observe popular beliefs. There is always a post here remaking when 17 is in the news. You may find it silly, but not everyone does.
So why do you accept their presence here despite their different perspective? Because they’re fellow researchers looking for the truth about Q. You can forgive some faulty beliefs.
On that basis, I’m not certain that my mere disinclination to believe in Q the way you do makes my research any less viable than anyone else’s.
Whether or not you believe in Q is irrelevant - Q is simply the personification of an assumption ('with some evidence') that there are actually a handful of good people left in Government with the power to actually change things for the better, against all odds. If you don't assume that, fine, I could care less.
I, and most of the other people here - willing to admit it or not - would hold hands with Marxists if it meant eradicating the sick, Fascistic merger of power between Corporatists and the US Government.
If you think there is a problem with Biden throwing shit from Blackrock and other Corporations into his cabinet, then we have common ground. If you think there is a problem with the Covid narrative being used to generate record profits for the Pharmaceutical Industry and control political dialogue across the world that weakens the political power of the people of every nation, then we have common ground.
Every single person in the Q movement believes in holding Democrats and Republicans, who are both corrupt - along with every other "leader" in the world who has enabled Western society to collapse in on itself, accountable. Many of us are more than willing to link hands with whoever else believes that. Is that your "contribution" here, or not?
It seems to me that you think you're engaging in ground-breaking diplomacy with a pack of 'delusional freaks' that could actually be hiding in plain sight on Reddit because the only thing that makes them 'delusional freaks' is their belief in "Q" as a legitimate operation. Suppress that, and what's the difference between us and r/stupidpol? r/libertarian? r/superstonks? "Q" is the only difference.
Based on everything I know about you, you would willingly put someone like Biden in charge of this country if it meant keeping Trump out of power - that makes your perspective dog shit, along with whatever "research" you think you're contributing to us.
If I'm wrong, it means you'd lock Trump, Biden, Hillary, Pelosi, and every other politician in a prison, in favor of maybe a more competent Bernie style outsider who has no intention to dismantle our liberties, strip us till we're defenseless, or cave like a coward to Establishment demands.
I actually appreciate your response. Mine:
I believe that there are people in the government who don't agree with the government, regardless of who is running the government. We saw it with Trump. I'm sure it's also true of Biden. I am not convinced Q is one of those people, and I think if Q wanted anyone to have a Great Awakening, outing himself as someone with credibility to make the claims he makes would do more for the Q movement than any Q post ever could.
We have common ground that neither party is free of corrupt individuals and we want them all held accountable, no matter who it is or what level of power they have.
Where we're going to break off is that I see Donald Trump as someone who very obvious represents that corruption I despite, while you do not. Perhaps it's just a difference in perspective, but I imagine we'd also have differences in what constitutes Western society collapsing.
The only difference between here and Reddit for me is that I am more likely there to say that I believe Q people are wrong about something when I believe they are, and when here, I am more likely to question you directly as to why believe it. I don't hide the fact that I do not support belief in Q, but if I'm here and talking with you about it, then I can at least try to close the gap between our perspectives.
And I am perfectly comfortable being wrong, especially since being wrong about Q costs me absolutely nothing.
I have never called you "delusional freaks" and have often gotten angrygrams from suspicious Reddit users for seeming too friendly toward Q supporters.
I mean, I very obviously don't believe that Trump is a viable choice for President, but I haven't stopped respectful conversation with the people who disagree with me. That's kind of the point. You are making profoundly important choices about your life and worldview based on the things you believe, so regardless of whether I agree with your beliefs, I do think they're important to understand from your perspective.
I suppose that means that you're wrong, then. :) I don't know if I'd go so far as to unilaterally lock people up based on what I read on the internet, but I would absolutely support some sort of divinely-neutral and deep-diving investigation into all those people, and anyone else who serves in public office. Anyone who committed prison-worthy crimes should be there. I'd love to see the whole two-party system take a dive altogether, to be honest.