If this hasn't been 100 percent verified by a trusted source, this is a dangerous thread to have and a ridiculous thread to sticky. The woman in the audience looks younger than the FBI woman (in recent pictures) The pictures of the FBI lady are far more youthful looking than she actually is - obviously old photos.
The OP did not theorize. OP posted an assertion made by some rando on the net, without any questioning in the Post Title, but rather, pushing the assertion made by the x poster as a fact.
That's the problem here. The first impulse and posting angle was NOT theorizing or questioning or hey, even let's check this!!!!
It was "Hey. This thing is a fact! We see you! This is actual NEWS!"
Frankly, I find it disgusting and ridiculous. It's a serious problem at GAW now. The quantity of clickbait/fake and non-questioning approach has outweighed what should be the priority for a Q board and or a research board: namely, taking information, questioning it, sourcing it, verifying it and THEN analysis it.
Yet, analysis (and conclusions) come before the questioning and the verifying.
Looking at the upvoted comments in this thread PROVES this.
u/gobby is quite right to point out how unhealthy it is to post things in this way and then for mods to sticky it (which the post itself is zero effort/low effort).
Let me state it this way, you're stupid if you fall for this. A two second search shows us that the FBI agent is now way older than her picture. She is obviously significantly older than the woman in the stands. Let me break it down even more - you know, for the simple minded here - it is dangerous because this type of hyped up rhetoric - "we got her now!" can lead to stupid people doing stupid things. If she is innocent, but some idiot gets it in his or her head that she was behind this ... well, we know where that can lead. Additionally, it's plain stupid for anybody who actually cared about what Q used to say to just automatically believe this without doing any research on their own. You know, like Q continually, repeatedly told people to do. And like I did to verify that ID picture of her is now quite old. It's also dangerous because it makes the board, and therefore q followers who jump on this type of thing without any more proof than an old picture, look like morons. But we do have plenty of those here too. Just like the people here who think Crooks is the guy in the picture of the deceased, even though it's clearly, evidentially, not him. Q attracted some really intelligent people, but also a lot of dummies.
If this hasn't been 100 percent verified by a trusted source, this is a dangerous thread to have and a ridiculous thread to sticky. The woman in the audience looks younger than the FBI woman (in recent pictures) The pictures of the FBI lady are far more youthful looking than she actually is - obviously old photos.
It's dangerous to theorize now? OK dad.
The OP did not theorize. OP posted an assertion made by some rando on the net, without any questioning in the Post Title, but rather, pushing the assertion made by the x poster as a fact.
That's the problem here. The first impulse and posting angle was NOT theorizing or questioning or hey, even let's check this!!!!
It was "Hey. This thing is a fact! We see you! This is actual NEWS!"
Frankly, I find it disgusting and ridiculous. It's a serious problem at GAW now. The quantity of clickbait/fake and non-questioning approach has outweighed what should be the priority for a Q board and or a research board: namely, taking information, questioning it, sourcing it, verifying it and THEN analysis it.
Yet, analysis (and conclusions) come before the questioning and the verifying.
Looking at the upvoted comments in this thread PROVES this.
u/gobby is quite right to point out how unhealthy it is to post things in this way and then for mods to sticky it (which the post itself is zero effort/low effort).
Let me state it this way, you're stupid if you fall for this. A two second search shows us that the FBI agent is now way older than her picture. She is obviously significantly older than the woman in the stands. Let me break it down even more - you know, for the simple minded here - it is dangerous because this type of hyped up rhetoric - "we got her now!" can lead to stupid people doing stupid things. If she is innocent, but some idiot gets it in his or her head that she was behind this ... well, we know where that can lead. Additionally, it's plain stupid for anybody who actually cared about what Q used to say to just automatically believe this without doing any research on their own. You know, like Q continually, repeatedly told people to do. And like I did to verify that ID picture of her is now quite old. It's also dangerous because it makes the board, and therefore q followers who jump on this type of thing without any more proof than an old picture, look like morons. But we do have plenty of those here too. Just like the people here who think Crooks is the guy in the picture of the deceased, even though it's clearly, evidentially, not him. Q attracted some really intelligent people, but also a lot of dummies.