Conspiracy Theory 'QAnon' Jumps To Primetime At Trump Rally

[Quix]

Thanks, the existence of YourNewsWire is news to me.  It may be just as phony as snopes.com (LOL)

By the way, the snopes URL mentions "blood drinking" in connection with the presumably false (?) article about Reeves's description of Hollywood.  The story I ran across did not mention blood drinking at all.

Funny that you should mention Katy Perry and cannibalism:  Cannibalism aside, I saw the video of the interview in which Katy confessed that she had "sold her soul to Satan."  She didn't look like she was kidding.  (When you notice all of the occult garbage in her music vids, they seem to confirm that she is a full-blown Satanist.)

Am  quite willing to go on record that the blood drinking & cannibalism & ritual sacrifice, raping babies & toddlers etc. will all turn out to be FAR WORSE AND FAR MORE COMMON than even the most convinced of us expect.

[Quix]

@Quix

Don't we all.  The Q believers on Twitter are the same.  They get angry when people don't buy into what they're selling. 

I read that's one of the hallmarks of a true conspiracy theorist.  One was---are they willing to consider that they could be wrong, or are they vehemently convinced?  And how do they respond when you decline to become a believer---do they leave it at that, or do they keep going, doggedly trying to evangelize, finally becoming upset when they hit a brick wall?

For me--it depends hugely on the sequence of events--when, after what amount of study & research etc. did  someone become a 'true  believer.' And do they become idiotically closed minded or do they still have some capacity to reason  and consider evidence at all fair-mindedly.

In my case, I have 53 years  of study of the globalist oligarchy under my belt--studying from extreme left across to extreme right etc. etc. etc.

I will note that my mother and her father knew about the oligarchy and their deliberate cause of the Great Depression--I heard that growing up as a kid.

I have a moderate amount of study of satanism's inroads into the culture and their rituals.

I haved 56 years of study into UFO's etc. under my belt.

In terms of Q-Anon--the globalism study has been a rich treasure trove of verification. OF COURSE I'd believe Q-Anon--because they obviously know the same historical facts I do.

At this point in time, I don't expect many even very bright people to wake-up very soon. I hope I haven't become too cynical but the evidence is massively in that direction because of the overt brazen stupidity and ignorance of such a huge percentage of the masses--even of many geniuses. It boggles my mind.
 
I just pray that the ultimate disclosure is devastatingly convincing and leaves all the clueless idiots speechless and temporarily catatonic. I think it will take that potent & dramatic a disclosure to change a lot of very rigid, closed minds.

[Quix]

@the_doc

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/keanu-reeves-blood-drinking/

None of this was true: Although Reeves had recently attended a motorcycle convention in Milan, the actor gave no such interview as described above while there, nor was he recorded by any other source (at any time or location) as having made comments about “Hollywood elites” drinking the blood of children. This story was completely fabricated by YourNewsWire, a fake news site that peddles in shamelessly fictional clickbait.

Within days, the false YourNewsWire story about Keanu Reeves had been pulled and the URL redirected to point to a different article on the site.

YourNewsWire previously ran a similarly false story about singer Katy Perry’s supposedly having expressed a preference for cannibalism.

I think you are massively too eager to conclude such hasn't been true.

I've usually found that even the most outrageous claims can contain a grain of truth.

And it is an absolute fact that it was  the most flaky groups making the most outrageous claims who first and  MOST ACCURATELY IDENTIFIED WHO HITLER WAS, WOULD BECOME AND WHAT HE WOULD DO.

In the current arena, the worst rumored so far, will turn out to have been a weak, wimpy, cursory description of stuff that has long been many times over far worse than any of the rumors.

[Quix]

Thanks. I did have a look at that post and one thing jumped out at me as factually wrong--
This seems to be rationalizing the fact that early on, Q made a lot of specific predictions that were definitively, verifiably wrong. "Huma Abedin's arrest will be announced on November 4th, and there will be riots and martial law." "Watch for false flags today." He learned his lesson and stopped.

Now, instead, he makes vague hints at things that are in the news and then claims credit for "predicting" when someone mentions something similar later on. This way, he can claim foreknowledge, but he can't be proven wrong, because his claims are basically never specific enough. He still manages, though, every month now there's some generic idea for how Big Things are Happening but nothing ever comes of it. "March Madness - Public will know soon." Hmm. Next up, April was supposed to be Arrests Month, and a huge month for the Awan case. Exactly nobody of any note was arrested in April, and Awan took a plea deal in June.

I would be happy to go through each of those proofs you posted but there simply isn't enough time in the day. I will say this though. The motive doesn't make sense. If Q wants to straightforwardly prove that he has an inside link to Trump, it would be completely simple for him to go to Trump and say "Donald, let me know the exact wording of your next tweet before you post it, and I'll post it first. Then everyone will know this thing is for real." Clear, unambiguous proof.

In fact a lot of these sites have fake "proofs" that claim to show this exact scenario, but none of them are actually real - the timezones don't match. Whenever Q quotes a Trump tweet, it's after Trump said it. Q supporters seem to recognize that this would be a reasonable proof of foreknowledge. So, why not do it?

Instead, we get vague pronouncements that go nowhere, cropped pics of somebody's ear, glamor shots of a pen, and people finding that Trump said some phrase months after it appeared in a Q post.

The usual rationalization for this is that Q's secrets are only for the faithful, and proving it so openly would ruin this somehow. That does not make this sound any less like a cult.

I think you are trying to  sieve micron bits of gold  with a 1/4" sieve. No way are you going to detect the truth of the matter. Your screens are far too coarse. And that coarseness appears to be tied with a huge chain to your ego  etc. etc. etc.

[the_doc]

For me--it depends hugely on the sequence of events--when, after what amount of study & research etc. did  someone become a 'true  believer.' And do they become idiotically closed minded or do they still have some capacity to reason  and consider evidence at all fair-mindedly.

In my case, I have 53 years  of study of the globalist oligarchy under my belt--studying from extreme left across to extreme right etc. etc. etc.

I have a moderate amount of study of satanism's inroads into the culture and their rituals.

I haved 56 years of study into UFO's etc. under my belt.

In terms of Q-Anon--the globalism study has been a rich treasure trove of verification. OF COURSE I'd believe Q-Anon--because they obviously know the same historical facts I do.

You and I are practically twins.  My interest in the globalists was piqued in 1963 (55 years ago), but it took off in a big way 50 years ago.  My studies of occult beliefs started a bit later.  (Really eerie stuff!) 

BTW, I have noticed that a lot of the TBR people following Q and the like are older guys and gals like us, who remember the ominous revelations about the "political Insiders" in about 1968.  For us, the whole sordid mess of our day fits together with what we already knew (especially in view of Biblical warnings about "principalities and powers and spiritual wickedness in high places").

[Quix]

Thanks.  I am a loveable, patient, teddy bear.  [LOL]

The problem is that I tend to stand my ground in a way that makes online folks assume that I'm angry. 

Well, nope, I'm not angry.  I'm not even impatient.  It's all because I am a thoroughly Calvinistic Christian.  I am sometimes a bit confrontational in the way I present my positions--seeking to elicit some kind of thoughtful reaction by my opponents--but I am not the least bit interested in notching my polemical gun.  The very idea is stupid.  Still, I'm  not willing to walk quickly away from the field when I think the Truth is at stake.   

Maybe I'm wrong in my self-examination, but I suspect that I care more about the Truth than most people do.  (Heck, I even like your Alternate Realities threads!  And as you know, I believe that most of the naysayers on those threads are mostly COMPLETE A_HOLES. [LOL])

Agreed.

[Silver Pines]

What?   Hadn't heard that.  Leaving when?

@XenaLee
 
Yes I guess he had enough of spending so much time away from his family.  He’ll do six episodes for the ninth season, and they’re going to kill him off. 

[Quix]

You and I are practically twins.  My interest in the globalists was piqued in 1963 (55 years ago), but it took off in a big way 50 years ago.  My studies of occult beliefs started a bit later.  (Really eerie stuff!) 

BTW, I have noticed that a lot of the TBR people following Q and the like are older guys and gals like us, who remember the ominous revelations about the "political Insiders" in about 1968.  For us, the whole sordid mess of our day fits together with what we already knew (especially in view of Biblical warnings about "principalities and powers and spiritual wickedness in high places").

Well put. Quite so. Thanks.

[XenaLee]

@XenaLee
 
Yes I guess he had enough of spending so much time away from his family.  He’ll do six episodes for the ninth season, and they’re going to kill him off.

Oh gaaawwd.... I hate it when that happens.  Not my Rick!  (not my Carl, not my Glenn, etc., etc., lolol)

I see that Maggie (Lauren Cohan) is in a new movie, Mile 22.  Looks interesting.

[edpc]

Change the word "nonsense" to the less arrogant word "stuff" and I will heartily agree with you.

Now that is funny, I think.

It is nonsense. You guys have your little rubber room to discuss all this here on the forum. We don't go in there and dump on what you think.  So, quit bringing this garbage into the rest of it.

[Silver Pines]

Oh gaaawwd.... I hate it when that happens.  Not my Rick!  (not my Carl, not my Glenn, etc., etc., lolol)

I see that Maggie (Lauren Cohan) is in a new movie, Mile 22.  Looks interesting.

@XenaLee

Lol, it's like they keep upping the ante every damn time!  It's going to be so bad when it happens.

I saw a trailer for her movie...is it Mark Wahlberg?  Brace yourself because










She's only doing six episodes, too.  And she's out.   

[XenaLee]

@XenaLee

Lol, it's like they keep upping the ante every damn time!  It's going to be so bad when it happens.

I saw a trailer for her movie...is it Mark Wahlberg?  Brace yourself because










She's only doing six episodes, too.  And she's out.   

This... is a perfect example (probably) of why I hate change.  It seems to always equate to something that I DON'T want!   

[roamer_1]

It is nonsense. You guys have your little rubber room to discuss all this here on the forum. We don't go in there and dump on what you think.  So, quit bringing this garbage into the rest of it.

To be fair @edpc ,YOU started the thread here about Q... Do you expect them not to defend? That ain't right. And no, I am not defending Q at all.

[Silver Pines]

This... is a perfect example (probably) of why I hate change.  It seems to always equate to something that I DON'T want!   

YES!

 

I wish we had a crying beer emoji

[Formerly Once-Ler]

To be fair @edpc ,YOU started the thread here about Q... Do you expect them not to defend? That ain't right. And no, I am not defending Q at all.

With respect @edpc I'm going to agree with @roamer_1 here.  I have not seen the q anon stuff other than this specific thread.  I think @Quix and @the_doc have expressed their genuine thoughts.  I honestly think the 4 pages of links says more about the q anon thing than anything I could say to disparage it.

but I share your frustration and dismay that clearly intelligent people get sucked into this stuff.  I'm a little sympathetic because I believed a lot of kooky stuff when Clinton orchistrated Ruby Ridge and Waco, with the help of the Trilateral Commission and the CFR.  I got better.

[edpc]

To be fair @edpc ,YOU started the thread here about Q... Do you expect them not to defend? That ain't right. And no, I am not defending Q at all.

Defend what, that we're going to have military tribunals for Obama, Hillary, and the worldwide pedo ring "soon"....?  It's effing stupid. 

[Quix]

It is nonsense. You guys have your little rubber room to discuss all this here on the forum. We don't go in there and dump on what you think.  So, quit bringing this garbage into the rest of it.

1. IIRC, I was  pinged to this thread. I normally consider it good manners to respond to pings.

2. You, in your narrow, rigid, constipated, terminally uninformed, prissy, haughty, smug, cheeky way can call the alt realities forum a rubber room, if you wish. Some of us prefer to think of it as a great egalitarian venue where atypical, fringe, unusual, paranormal, non-kosher, non-Politically-Correct, alternative, etc. postulations, hypotheses, events, sequences, topics, relationships, observations can be discussed with  mutual respect by folks with markedly above average IQ's. It's kind of understandable that you don't feel you would fit in all that well.

3. Spewing garbage seems to be in the eye and mouth of the spewer. One man's garbage  is another man's treasure. Perhaps you haven't lived long enough to realize that.

4. imho, the thoughtfulness, perceptiveness, discernment, analyses, observations, logic, wealth of background etc. commonly displayed on the Alt Realities forum is markedly above average for blog websites.

5. And, actually, our mutual caring and respect is quite above average, as well. That might be a challenging construct for you to wrap your understanding around. However, learning to grok the idea of mutual respect could be a fruitful exercise for your life.

6. On the other hand, with different fingers, given how likely it is that you'll continue on your unmerry way dispensing waves of haughty hostility to all you construe as not measuring up to your Majestic  Loftiness--you are welcome to trod such paths elsewhere as you and crew find fitting.

7. And we will exercise our powers of observation and our powers of discriminating between good vs bad to mark your displays of charity as a great example of where NOT to go. I'm not entirely sure I've translated what I wanted to communicate sufficiently into your language but I have tried to do so.

Cheers.

cc: @the_doc

[edpc]

1. IIRC, I was  pinged to this thread. I normally consider it good manners to respond to pings.

2. You, in your narrow, rigid, constipated, terminally uninformed, prissy, haughty, smug, cheeky way can call the alt realities forum a rubber room, if you wish. Some of us prefer to think of it as a great egalitarian venue where atypical, fringe, unusual, paranormal, non-kosher, non-Politically-Correct, alternative, etc. postulations, hypotheses, events, sequences, topics, relationships, observations can be discussed with  mutual respect by folks with markedly above average IQ's. It's kind of understandable that you don't feel you would fit in all that well.

3. Spewing garbage seems to be in the eye and mouth of the spewer. One man's garbage  is another man's treasure. Perhaps you haven't lived long enough to realize that.

4. imho, the thoughtfulness, perceptiveness, discernment, analyses, observations, logic, wealth of background etc. commonly displayed on the Alt Realities forum is markedly above average for blog websites.

5. And, actually, our mutual caring and respect is quite above average, as well. That might be a challenging construct for you to wrap your understanding around. However, learning to grok the idea of mutual respect could be a fruitful exercise for your life.

6. On the other hand, with different fingers, given how likely it is that you'll continue on your unmerry way dispensing waves of haughty hostility to all you construe as not measuring up to your Majestic  Loftiness--you are welcome to trod such paths elsewhere as you and crew find fitting.

7. And we will exercise our powers of observation and our powers of discriminating between good vs bad to mark your displays of charity as a great example of where NOT to go. I'm not entirely sure I've translated what I wanted to communicate sufficiently into your language but I have tried to do so.

Cheers.

cc: @the_doc

Can I copyright and patent this?  It's a surefire cure for insomnia.

[Quix]

Defend what, that we're going to have military tribunals for Obama, Hillary, and the worldwide pedo ring "soon"....?  It's effing stupid. 

"It's effing stupid."

I do confess that it is quite conceivable that you are an expert on that! I'm quite willing to bow to your expertise on that topic--in some respects. Though it sometimes appears that you have a problem calling "peaches"  "cacti" on occasion.

Oh, BTW, when the 12 military tribunals that have been meeting for about 6 months with 12 judges each (because the death penalty is involved)--when their deliberations are made  much more public, where should we congregate to pin the tail on the donkey at your house?

[roamer_1]

Defend what, that we're going to have military tribunals for Obama, Hillary, and the worldwide pedo ring "soon"....?  It's effing stupid.

@edpc
Nevertheless, or maybe rather, regardless, you provided the opportunity for them to come out from their 'rubber room' - Jeer all you like, but to expect them not to rise to defend their views is unsportsmanlike (not fair play).

If you want to contain them in AltReal, then don't make mention of it elsewhere. If you mention it elsewhere, I think they have a right to be heard. And again, I do not defend Q-Anon at all, in the least.

[Quix]

@edpc
Nevertheless, or maybe rather, regardless, you provided the opportunity for them to come out from their 'rubber room' - Jeer all you like, but to expect them not to rise to defend their views is unsportsmanlike (not fair play).

If you want to contain them in AltReal, then don't make mention of it elsewhere. If you mention it elsewhere, I think they have a right to be heard. And again, I do not defend Q-Anon at all, in the least.

Thanks, Roamer. I agree. However, it does give us the thrill of a field trip away from our rubber room. LOL. It can be a bit interesting  to see  how normies live. And, it can leave us feeling more fortunate to realize how our padded abode helps us feel so comfortable in all the cushy Lazl-Y-Boys.

[Quix]

Can I copyright and patent this?  It's a surefire cure for insomnia.

Only if the royalties are sufficiently high.

[Emjay]

YES!

 

I wish we had a crying beer emoji

@XenaLee @CatherineofAragon   Y'all's  discussion of Walking Dead is a lot more interesting than the Q discussion.  Just saying.

[edpc]

Oh, BTW, when the 12 military tribunals that have been meeting for about 6 months with 12 judges each (because the death penalty is involved)--when their deliberations are made much more public, where should we congregate to pin the tail on the donkey at your house

GTFOH with this secret tribunal tripe.  Nuremburg took less than a year with an active, open hearing.  Besides, a military tribunal is used on enemy combatants during a time or war or declared rebellion.  Are you seriously trying to convince us we are in CW2 and nobody knows it?  How do you see the screen, with that rubber nose in the way?

[Silver Pines]

Yes.  Because of that episode .  It made me sick and I just couldn't watch it any more.  They made a big mistake with that episode because I think they lost a lot of viewers.

@Emjay

I'm pretty sure they did, too.