5 ms·

> The public face of 8chan is Jim Watkins, a pig farmer in the Philippines who many experts believe is also the person behind the shadowy persona of “Q” at the

> The public face of 8chan is Jim Watkins, a pig farmer in the Philippines who many experts believe is also the person behind the shadowy persona of “Q” at the center of the conspiracy theory movement. It’s funny to me that people think Jim is capable of leading a worldwide movement and has enough opsec not to get caught. Have you seen the guy on YouTube? Give it a watch and decide for yourself. I followed Q (not qanon) in relation to spygate, and let’s just say I was surprised. It’s not some basement mouth breather, it’s state level. Have the people who followed Q also considered it could be some Russian or other country’s psyop against us? Again think for yourself folks. Anyway, I’m convinced Q at this point is out of the bag. Even if you banned it on the clear web it would spill out from the dark web into every public space. The only way to attack it effectively now is to get transparent about some of the central claims Q says control the levers of power: 1. What was happening on Epstein’s island? 2. What evidence does Assange have regarding the source of hacked emails? 3. What were the deleted emails on HRC server and how did the Clinton foundation amass so much money? Interesting enough just now after two years of Q, we’re getting some more information about these, so it really is going to be do or die for “qanon”. https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/10/09/politics/pompeo-clinton-emails/index.html https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/10/09/poli... https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/17318376/united-states-v-maxwell/?filed_after=&filed_before=&entry_gte=&entry_lte=&order_by=desc https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/17318376/united-states-...

theplague42 6y ago
What about it makes it "state level"? Dozens of failed predictions. Vague, open-ended insinuations that can be interpreted by anyone in totally different ways. No legitimate information that can't be found with a search engine. Whoever made up Q is similar to Trump in that they identified a group of people with real problems (loss of faith in institutions, fear of losing social power) to whom they could spread propaganda, but have no real solutions to any of the identified problems. I find it ironic that you say "think for yourself" while repeating nonsense propaganda that has little to no impact outside of made-up scandals targeting the Clintons.
- Covzire 6y ago
  "made-up scandals" If I had the choice of a superpower, whether flight, or invincibility, or setting things on fire with my mind, I wouldn't be all that disappointed if I had to settle for a superpower where I could force half the population and the vast majority of journalists to simply give me the benefit of the doubt of any situation and not question things too much beyond that. There's almost nothing I could do wrong and be punished for by society.
- nootropicat 6y ago
  I think the point of Q is to prevent conservative American boomers from organizing, by duping them into thinking that 'their guys' are already winning and they don't have to do anything.
bigbubba 6y ago
> The only way to attack it effectively now is to get transparent [...] I think you're right. Looney theories flourish when authorities are perceived to lack credibility. It's little wonder that politicians of any persuasion are popular focal points for such doubt; either because they are known habitual liars or because they are simply perceived as such by those on the other side. Transparency and blind justice are key to stopping the spread of loony theories. If Jeffery Epstein hadn't received preferential treatment when he was convicted in 2008, I think few would remember him today (much less harbor so many suspicions about what politicians may have been involved with him.) Consider moon landings: Many people doubt they occurred because the American government lost a ton of credibility during the cold war. I considered the possibility that it was faked, but easily concluded that it was real because NASA is very transparent with the details. The information they've made public about it has breadth and depth; for nearly any little tiny detail of those missions you can think of, a little bit of research will reveal information about it. Autistic detail of anything from the helmet visors to the guidance computers is all available for anybody who chooses to look; to fabricate a story with such breadth and depth is simply inconceivable. The truth of the moon landings is apparent because NASA is open with it.
- ed25519FUUU 6y ago
  > If Jeffery Epstein hadn't received preferential treatment when he was convicted in 2008, I think few would remember him today (much less harbor so many suspicions about what politicians may have been involved with him.) The Epstein saga, I think, is providing the most fuel for the fire right now. Just yesterday Ghislaine Maxwell's 2016 deposition was unsealed, and it mentions Clinton and Prince Andrew, among others[1]. The conspiracy burned for 2 years, and when more information is unsealed it only confirms things people believe. Anyone watching knew something was up with Epstein, his sweet-heart deal for sex crimes against children, and that island, and his untimely death. Until everything is unsealed and in the light, things are only going to get more intense. Furthermore, there seems to be a lot of bipartisan appetite for truth in regards to Epstein, partly because many believe it also implicates Trump. How powerful is something that unites Qanon and Trump's critics under the same flag? 1. https://free.law/pdf/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1137.2_2.pdf https://free.law/pdf/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1137.2_2.pdf

theplague42 6y ago

What about it makes it "state level"? Dozens of failed predictions. Vague, open-ended insinuations that can be interpreted by anyone in totally different ways. No legitimate information that can't be found with a search engine. Whoever made up Q is similar to Trump in that they identified a group of people with real problems (loss of faith in institutions, fear of losing social power) to whom they could spread propaganda, but have no real solutions to any of the identified problems. I find it ironic that you say "think for yourself" while repeating nonsense propaganda that has little to no impact outside of made-up scandals targeting the Clintons.

Covzire 6y ago
"made-up scandals" If I had the choice of a superpower, whether flight, or invincibility, or setting things on fire with my mind, I wouldn't be all that disappointed if I had to settle for a superpower where I could force half the population and the vast majority of journalists to simply give me the benefit of the doubt of any situation and not question things too much beyond that. There's almost nothing I could do wrong and be punished for by society.
nootropicat 6y ago
I think the point of Q is to prevent conservative American boomers from organizing, by duping them into thinking that 'their guys' are already winning and they don't have to do anything.

bigbubba 6y ago

> The only way to attack it effectively now is to get transparent [...] I think you're right. Looney theories flourish when authorities are perceived to lack credibility. It's little wonder that politicians of any persuasion are popular focal points for such doubt; either because they are known habitual liars or because they are simply perceived as such by those on the other side. Transparency and blind justice are key to stopping the spread of loony theories. If Jeffery Epstein hadn't received preferential treatment when he was convicted in 2008, I think few would remember him today (much less harbor so many suspicions about what politicians may have been involved with him.) Consider moon landings: Many people doubt they occurred because the American government lost a ton of credibility during the cold war. I considered the possibility that it was faked, but easily concluded that it was real because NASA is very transparent with the details. The information they've made public about it has breadth and depth; for nearly any little tiny detail of those missions you can think of, a little bit of research will reveal information about it. Autistic detail of anything from the helmet visors to the guidance computers is all available for anybody who chooses to look; to fabricate a story with such breadth and depth is simply inconceivable. The truth of the moon landings is apparent because NASA is open with it.

ed25519FUUU 6y ago
> If Jeffery Epstein hadn't received preferential treatment when he was convicted in 2008, I think few would remember him today (much less harbor so many suspicions about what politicians may have been involved with him.) The Epstein saga, I think, is providing the most fuel for the fire right now. Just yesterday Ghislaine Maxwell's 2016 deposition was unsealed, and it mentions Clinton and Prince Andrew, among others[1]. The conspiracy burned for 2 years, and when more information is unsealed it only confirms things people believe. Anyone watching knew something was up with Epstein, his sweet-heart deal for sex crimes against children, and that island, and his untimely death. Until everything is unsealed and in the light, things are only going to get more intense. Furthermore, there seems to be a lot of bipartisan appetite for truth in regards to Epstein, partly because many believe it also implicates Trump. How powerful is something that unites Qanon and Trump's critics under the same flag? 1. https://free.law/pdf/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1137.2_2.pdf https://free.law/pdf/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1137.2_2.pdf