The fact that some Q followers called themselves Q Anon has nothing to do with Qanon (the singular entity Q + Anons) not being a media creation. It could very well be that some Q followers called themselves Q Anon because the CIA implanted the idea directly, or through the media. Regardless of whether or not that is true, Q states explicitly:
There is 'Q'. 1
There are 'Anons'. 2
There is no 'Qanon'. 3
Media labeling as 'Qanon' is a method [deliberate] to combine [attach] 'Q' to comments _theories _suggestions _statements [and ACTIONS] made by 2.
WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU CANNOT ATTACK THE INFORMATION [primary source 1]?
DO YOU ATTACK [& TYPECAST] THROUGH USE OF OTHERS?
Not all 'Anons' are authentic [injected].
This is not ambiguous. Q states that Qanon is a media label (aka media creation). Even if the term didn't start there, it became the idea it is today because of the media.
This is exactly the same thing that has been done throughout history. If you look up the term "Conspiracy Theory" in old newspapers, most of the time they use that phrase to talk about investigators coming up with theories to solve a crime of conspiracy. No negative connotation is included. Sometimes it is used to discredit, but most of the uses in old newspapers were innocuous.
Then in 1967 the C_A put out Countering Criticisms of the Warren Report. It coins the term "Conspiracy Theorist", a directed attack on an individual who looks at evidence of a conspiracy. This is not the same as a general theory, but a theorist, a person, who should not be listened to. It says:
The aim of this dispatch is to provide material_ for_countering and discrediting the claims of the conspiracy theorists so as to inhibit the circulation of such claims in other countries.
When you look at newspaper archives, this is the first mention of "conspiracy theorist" ever recorded. It also changed the idea of "conspiracy theory" from sometimes derisive, to always derisive. It is now a term used solely to censor all evidence to the contrary of the official narrative.
Same with Qanon. In this case however it discredits an entire group of people who would otherwise be listened to. As a statement of derision, it is absolutely a media creation.
I disavow Qanon all the time.
Flynn disavowing Qanon is exactly what he should be doing. By calling attention to it people are much more likely to find posts exactly like this that show that
Q + Anon =/= Qanon
This makes people a lot more likely to actually look at Q, even if they have heard that Qanon is a misinformation campaign or a cult. Because Qanon is not Q.
At all.
The fact that some Q followers called themselves Q Anon has nothing to do with Qanon (the singular entity Q + Anons) not being a media creation. It could very well be that some Q followers called themselves Q Anon because the CIA implanted the idea directly, or through the media. Regardless of whether or not that is true, Q states explicitly:
There is 'Q'. 1
There are 'Anons'. 2
There is no 'Qanon'. 3
Media labeling as 'Qanon' is a method [deliberate] to combine [attach] 'Q' to comments _theories _suggestions _statements [and ACTIONS] made by 2.
WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU CANNOT ATTACK THE INFORMATION [primary source 1]?
DO YOU ATTACK [& TYPECAST] THROUGH USE OF OTHERS?
Not all 'Anons' are authentic [injected].
This is not ambiguous. Q states that Qanon is a media label (aka media creation). Even if the term didn't start there, it became the idea it is today because of the media.
This is exactly the same thing that has been done throughout history. If you look up the term "Conspiracy Theory" in old newspapers, most of the time they use that phrase to talk about investigators coming up with theories to solve a crime of conspiracy. No negative connotation is included. Sometimes it is used to discredit, but most of the uses in old newspapers were innocuous.
Then in 1967 the C_A put out Countering Criticisms of the Warren Report. It coins the term "Conspiracy Theorist", a directed attack on an individual who looks at evidence of a conspiracy. This is not the same as a general theory, but a theorist, a person, who should not be listened to. It says:
The aim of this dispatch is to provide material_ for_countering and discrediting the claims of the conspiracy theorists so as to inhibit the circulation of such claims in other countries.
When you look at newspaper archives, this is the first mention of "conspiracy theorist" ever recorded. It also changed the idea of "conspiracy theory" from sometimes derisive, to always derisive. It is now a term used solely to censor all evidence to the contrary of the official narrative.
Same with Qanon. In this case however it discredits an entire group of people who would otherwise be listened to. As a statement of derision, it is absolutely a media creation.
I disavow Qanon all the time.
Flynn disavowing Qanon is exactly what he should be doing. By calling attention to it people are much more likely to find posts exactly like this that show that
Q + Anon =/= Qanon
This makes people a lot more likely to actually look at Q, even if they have heard that Qanon is a misinformation campaign or a cult. Because Qanon is not Q.
At all.
The fact that some Q followers called themselves Q Anon has nothing to do with Qanon (the idea of the singular entity Q + Anons) not being a media creation. It could very well be that some Q followers called themselves Q Anon because the CIA implanted the idea directly, or through the media. Regardless of whether or not that is true, Q states explicitly:
There is 'Q'. 1
There are 'Anons'. 2
There is no 'Qanon'. 3
Media labeling as 'Qanon' is a method [deliberate] to combine [attach] 'Q' to comments _theories _suggestions _statements [and ACTIONS] made by 2.
WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU CANNOT ATTACK THE INFORMATION [primary source 1]?
DO YOU ATTACK [& TYPECAST] THROUGH USE OF OTHERS?
Not all 'Anons' are authentic [injected].
This is not ambiguous. Q states that Qanon is a media label (aka media creation). Even if the term didn't start there, it became the idea it is today because of the media.
This is exactly the same thing that has been done throughout history. If you look up the term "Conspiracy Theory" in old newspapers, most of the time they use that phrase to talk about investigators coming up with theories to solve a crime of conspiracy. No negative connotation is included. Sometimes it is used to discredit, but most of the uses in old newspapers were innocuous.
Then in 1967 the C_A put out Countering Criticisms of the Warren Report. It coins the term "Conspiracy Theorist", a directed attack on an individual who looks at evidence of a conspiracy. This is not the same as a general theory, but a theorist, a person, who should not be listened to. It says:
The aim of this dispatch is to provide material_ for_countering and discrediting the claims of the conspiracy theorists so as to inhibit the circulation of such claims in other countries.
When you look at newspaper archives, this is the first mention of "conspiracy theorist" ever recorded. It also changed the idea of "conspiracy theory" from sometimes derisive, to always derisive. It is now a term used solely to censor all evidence to the contrary of the official narrative.
Same with Qanon. In this case however it discredits an entire group of people who would otherwise be listened to. As a statement of derision, it is absolutely a media creation.
I disavow Qanon all the time.
Flynn disavowing Qanon is exactly what he should be doing. By calling attention to it people are much more likely to find posts exactly like this that show that
Q + Anon =/= Qanon
This makes people a lot more likely to actually look at Q, even if they have heard that Qanon is a misinformation campaign or a cult. Because Qanon is not Q.
At all.