In any case, why is critical thought not applied? AJ can still mean Al Jazeera. The fact that ANYONE questions Q is attacked vehemently, but surely we must question everything?
Well, one can only assume you were not there and really did not follow the information.
This is a Q board. One wonders why you are here.
It is not a matter of questioning Q, but questioning people's interpretations.
Anyway, I have zero interest in 'convincing' you. Make up your own mind. But at the least, it totally refutes your assertion that "Q only mentioned AJ once" as if there is NOT an abundance of content in the q research boards that Jones is an asset and a provocateur.
Nope still not convinced.
All that supposed proof is circumstantial.
In any case, why is critical thought not applied? AJ can still mean Al Jazeera. The fact that ANYONE questions Q is attacked vehemently, but surely we must question everything?
Well, one can only assume you were not there and really did not follow the information.
This is a Q board. One wonders why you are here.
It is not a matter of questioning Q, but questioning people's interpretations.
Anyway, I have zero interest in 'convincing' you. Make up your own mind. But at the least, it totally refutes your assertion that "Q only mentioned AJ once" as if there is NOT an abundance of content in the q research boards that Jones is an asset and a provocateur.
Have your nice day.
As said AJ does not necessarily mean Alex Jones.