It’s not about politics

bhops

Last of the famous international screw ups.
I haven't been following the QAnon thing, because it's obvious bullshit from the start. But if what you are saying is correct, then that suggests that the author has some sort of info about what song is going to be played at a Trump rally. That probably means they have watched previous Trump rallies and so know what Trump's intro music is. If he always uses different walk-on music, then it might mean that QAnon is someone on the Trump team. But it would also mean they are definitely not a high-ranking official in the administration, because advance knowledge of walk-0n music is not going to be part of the brief at that level.
And Trumps response that that specific lyric? What about knowing some lines out of the Kim video in advance? That one really spooked me out.
 

scatterkeir

Active Member
If i offered some Q proofs 9I'm still genuinely sitting on the fence over this) if I ran them past you would you care to refute them? I'm genuinely miffed as to how they have 'guessed' some of the things that have come true and wouldn't mind hearing an explanation on how they might have been done.
If there is a 'proof' that I can't debunk yet with simple googling that won't convince me, partly because of the whole smell of 'Pizzagate Bollocks The Sequel' about the whole thing, and partly because of the way some people think 'the only explanation I can think of must be true!' when there's always other possible explanations, ones you haven't thought of. I understand that my postion must be frustrating, I don't like being on the other end of "Evidence!" "Nah, not interested".

An example of the poor quality of the evidence is - one of you (I think it was Derek) stated how impressed he was that QAnon tweeted the "from sea to shining sea" lyric just before Trump came on to it, and it seems that lots of believers were similarly impressed, and felt that it was proof that Q was whatever. But it seems that it's simply that Trump always comes on to that song at his rallies and events.
 

Derek17

Well-Known Member
If there is a 'proof' that I can't debunk yet with simple googling that won't convince me, partly because of the whole smell of 'Pizzagate Bollocks The Sequel' about the whole thing, and partly because of the way some people think 'the only explanation I can think of must be true!' when there's always other possible explanations, ones you haven't thought of. I understand that my postion must be frustrating, I don't like being on the other end of "Evidence!" "Nah, not interested".

An example of the poor quality of the evidence is - one of you (I think it was Derek) stated how impressed he was that QAnon tweeted the "from sea to shining sea" lyric just before Trump came on to it, and it seems that lots of believers were similarly impressed, and felt that it was proof that Q was whatever. But it seems that it's simply that Trump always comes on to that song at his rallies and events.
Q doesn't tweet, just for the record lol.

Again, Trump doesn't usually point out that line, and certainly not in such an over-the-top way. But of course, that's only one little "coincidence." That alone obviously isn't convincing. The convincing thing is that similar such things have occurred dozens of times. The chances of that are staggeringly low.

I'm open to other possibilities. But what are they? If it was a tweet that Trump sent out, theoretically, if it was saved somewhere ahead of time, someone could find a way to access it and make themselves look psychic. I'm no techie, so I have no idea how that would be done, but at least it's theoretically possible as some kind of alternative explanation. But for many of the "coincidences," I struggle to find any other possibilities. You can't hack Trump's brain and predict what he'll do or say ahead of time unless it's part of a pre-written speech, which is not possible in regard to most instances either.
 

bhops

Last of the famous international screw ups.
If there is a 'proof' that I can't debunk yet with simple googling that won't convince me, partly because of the whole smell of 'Pizzagate Bollocks The Sequel' about the whole thing, and partly because of the way some people think 'the only explanation I can think of must be true!' when there's always other possible explanations, ones you haven't thought of. I understand that my postion must be frustrating, I don't like being on the other end of "Evidence!" "Nah, not interested".

An example of the poor quality of the evidence is - one of you (I think it was Derek) stated how impressed he was that QAnon tweeted the "from sea to shining sea" lyric just before Trump came on to it, and it seems that lots of believers were similarly impressed, and felt that it was proof that Q was whatever. But it seems that it's simply that Trump always comes on to that song at his rallies and events.
No you're not getting it about the lyric, he comes on to the song sure but he specifically stopped and cupped his ear and sung that particular lyric. Now out of a whole song why stop and sing only that lyric and 15 mins after a Q drop? As I say I'm still on the fence but when stuff like that happens it's spooky.
 

scatterkeir

Active Member
No you're not getting it about the lyric, he comes on to the song sure but he specifically stopped and cupped his ear and sung that particular lyric. Now out of a whole song why stop and sing only that lyric and 15 mins after a Q drop? As I say I'm still on the fence but when stuff like that happens it's spooky.
The specific phrase has been associated with Trump since long before that Q dump, e.g. http://thehill.com/homenews/adminis...l-unlikely-to-stretch-from-sea-to-shining-sea
 

scatterkeir

Active Member
No you're not getting it about the lyric, he comes on to the song sure but he specifically stopped and cupped his ear and sung that particular lyric. Now out of a whole song why stop and sing only that lyric and 15 mins after a Q drop? As I say I'm still on the fence but when stuff like that happens it's spooky.
But what if I WAS to convince you on this one? You already accept that there's nothing in SOME of them, so this would just be another one. Then you might go 'but what about these ones?' - perhaps you can see that I might not want to take on the long-term responsibility, or even to begin to do so. One of the things these people like doing is to engage in bad faith and sap us of time and energy that would be more productively used elsewhere. Being open-minded is one thing, but life is short and we ought to take care what we spend it on. I employ Occam's razor, and I don't need to know how a magician did a trick to know that it's probably not real magic.
 

bhops

Last of the famous international screw ups.
But what if I WAS to convince you on this one? You already accept that there's nothing in SOME of them, so this would just be another one. Then you might go 'but what about these ones?' - perhaps you can see that I might not want to take on the long-term responsibility, or even to begin to do so. One of the things these people like doing is to engage in bad faith and sap us of time and energy that would be more productively used elsewhere. Being open-minded is one thing, but life is short and we ought to take care what we spend it on. I employ Occam's razor, and I don't need to know how a magician did a trick to know that it's probably not real magic.
Yes I do get it, however the problem is I don't feel like you particularly debunked the last one, due to the timing of the Q post and Trump specifically stopping on stage to sing that lyric alone. OK, but yeah I do get it. I'm still on the fence while Derek is clearly all in. But I feel like it's worth keeping an open mind. I notice I posted a couple of Q proofs and you choose the easier of the two to debunk, LOL. The second one (which is actually the far more interesting of the two) was Q a week before the NK summit quoting lines that were straight out of the video that Trump had made to play to Kim. As far as I know that video was never made public before the summit so how the fuck did Q know what was in it?

That is my problem with Q debunkers, they choose the easy stuff to highlight but don't attempt to explain more problematic proofs like that one.

It really wouldn't surprise me to discover that someone like Bannon (who served in Navy special ops) was behind Q. If you think about it it has been a great rallying call to much of Trump's base.
 

scatterkeir

Active Member
The second one (which is actually the far more interesting of the two) was Q a week before the NK summit quoting lines that were straight out of the video that Trump had made to play to Kim. As far as I know that video was never made public before the summit so how the fuck did Q know what was in it?
If that actually happened, my belief is that there is some other explanation. Just like my analogy of the magic trick, I don't need to know what it is to believe that.
 

scatterkeir

Active Member
That is my problem with Q debunkers, they choose the easy stuff to highlight but don't attempt to explain more problematic proofs like that one.
It's partly because most 'Q debunkers' are probably people like me that don't want to put much time and energy into it, partly because it seems very obvious to them that it's nonsense. Just like Pizzagate.
 

Anaesthesine

Angel of Distemper
QAnon and the BLUE ROSE SOCIETY are one and the same. Don't believe me?

1) How did Morrissey get permission to play in the US after threatening Donald Trump's life?

2) Why has Morrissey chosen this moment to openly support the far-right agenda?

3) Why was Morrissey "seriously considering" a run for Mayor of London in 2016?

4) Why does Morrissey claim to be two people?

5) Why has Morrissey been pictured eating pizza on multiple occasions?

Just wait for Morrissey's set at Tropicalia Fest; first he will accept a blue rose from a fan in the front row during "National Front Disco." Later he will do a special rendition of Bengali in Platforms (with Gustavo singing the final verse). At the encore, a stage invader wearing a MAGA hat will bow and give Morrissey a note. That note will contain coded instructions for a meeting with members of the Deep State in an effort to convince UK Brexit and US Trump supporters to aid Russia and Cambridge Analytica in their attempt to disrupt voting in several sensitive House districts in the upcoming US elections.

Morrissey is the ultimate double-agent, playing both political sides and playing dumb in the press. Don't fall for it.

You read it here first.

/s
 
Last edited:

Derek17

Well-Known Member
It's partly because most 'Q debunkers' are probably people like me that don't want to put much time and energy into it, partly because it seems very obvious to them that it's nonsense. Just like Pizzagate.
Actually, you should give yourself credit. You don't have bad motives, while a lot of Q debunkers, such as Alex Jones, seem to. It really makes you wonder why certain people of influence are so eager to discredit Q without actually discrediting Q. All I would say is, don't be a sheep.

I'm not really "all in" on Q. As I've said, if I had reason to, I would reconsider Q's legitimacy. But you really do have to delve in to it to understand some of the intricacies.
 

Derek17

Well-Known Member
It's partly because most 'Q debunkers' are probably people like me that don't want to put much time and energy into it, partly because it seems very obvious to them that it's nonsense. Just like Pizzagate.
A good thing to address at this point though is to ask explicitly: why would Alex Jones try to discredit Q? Is Q too crazy for the craziest nut on the Internet? Is that really the explanation?

My view is that some commentators, particularly the more old-school conservative crowd, distance themselves because they think Q is too "out there" or unbelievable. I can understand that. But then there are others whose motives you have to question. Jerome Corsi and Alex Jones were all in on Q early on until Q called them out rather indirectly for trying to profit off the movement, and they proceeded to freak out and started shitting on Q because covering Q no longer served their interests, monetarily or in terms of them being able to maintain credibility. Q was undermining them because they were supposed to be the real insider specialists, and then Q shows up and steals the thunder of Jones et al.

All this to say, there are a lot of moving parts to understand with regard to this whole phenomenon and people's reactions to it. I don't suppose you would align yourself with Alex Jones, after all. The issue is more complicated than just giving it a cursory glance and saying, "yeah, this looks too crazy to be true, and all these people are calling b.s. (for whatever reason), so I'm gonna say it's probably b.s. and not look in to it."

When you think about it, doesn't the whole concept of Q fit within everything Trump has done all along in terms of throwing the rules out the window to a great extent and saying forget the status quo? It's a revolutionary concept, and it's a brilliant operation no matter how you slice it.
 

scatterkeir

Active Member
I had no opinion on why Jones was anti-Q, but you seem to have explained it himself, it's for business reasons.

I don't think the whole Q thing fits with the way Trump works at all, this sort of cryptic long game is so not him.

I don't think it's a brilliant operation at all, it's just a thing that's caught on and become more successful than Pizzagate. I don't think we can properly judge it until we see how many murders of innocent people it inspires in the end.
 

Derek17

Well-Known Member
I had no opinion on why Jones was anti-Q, but you seem to have explained it himself, it's for business reasons.

I don't think the whole Q thing fits with the way Trump works at all, this sort of cryptic long game is so not him.

I don't think it's a brilliant operation at all, it's just a thing that's caught on and become more successful than Pizzagate. I don't think we can properly judge it until we see how many murders of innocent people it inspires in the end.
To the bolded:

The key part of your phrase is "I don't think" that's the way Trump works. Exactly. He has consciously portrayed himself in a certain way over the past couple of years for a reason. I think he's a better actor than anyone would give him credit for, and the way he has manipulated the media and the pundits has been nothing short of brilliant. So we can talk about his cryptic long-game without even thinking about Q. But here's a Q-related example: remember last October, I think it was, when he said at a media scrum, "this is the calm before the storm," and people in the media were like "what do you mean, Mr. President? What storm?" and he just smirked and didn't elaborate? Cryptic long-game?

In what way is it not a brilliant operation? It has reached millions of people and gotten them to pool their resources and do extensive research on various topics, and also to spread this information among the public, all while avoiding the control of the mainstream media. Trump's goal has been to circumvent the mainstream media to get his message out. He has emphasized this all along. Wouldn't this be the perfect method? The proof is in the pudding as to its effectiveness, anyway.

Murders of innocent people? You mean like the people connected to the deep-state who train people to commit school-shootings? Q disavows violence, and if we do see more acts of violence attributed to people who follow Q, my money would be on the deep-state carrying out false-flag events as part of a smear campaign.

In the end, Q will be judged based on delivering the goods: will the truly heinous people be arrested and tried? Will the pharmaceutical industrial complex be brought down? Will the technologies that have been kept from us be released? And there is so much more. Q has "dreamt big," in Trumpian fashion. If Q is indeed tied to Trump, we know he will deliver.
 
Last edited:

Oh my god. it's Robby!

spontaneously luminescent
Democratic socialism is an oxymoron, friend.
Right, all those socialist policy achievements of Western Europe for the betterment of most citizens were achieved through revolution and or what?
Magic? :rolleyes:
The breadth and width of your stupidity when it comes to how history, government, commerce and on and on really knows no bounds, does it Derek?
& I’m no friend to anyone that supports the likes of scum like trump and never will be :straightface:
 

Derek17

Well-Known Member
Right, all those socialist policy achievements of Western Europe for the betterment of most citizens were achieved through revolution and or what?
Magic? :rolleyes:
The breadth and width of your stupidity when it comes to how history, government, commerce and on and on really knows no bounds, does it Derek?
& I’m no friend to anyone that supports the likes of scum like trump and never will be :straightface:
With a lot of the socialists/communists I've encountered lately, they have a distinct hate for democracy. There is no doubt that democracy and socialism, especially in practice, become antithetical over time.

Anyway, I'm happy to be friends with anyone regardless of their background or beliefs. Maybe one day you'll become a little more tolerant and feel the same way! :)
 
Top Bottom