>more inclusive
a code word for sexist, normal-phobic and racist.
>>16582812
They accuse people of racism, while they are racist themselves.
They accuse people of sexism, while they are sexist themselves.
For example quotas for wimin and black people. That's blatant sexist + racist, it's discrimination.
Watch this video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZX5MHNvjw7o
Is that racist?
No, it isn't.
Of course even they would say so, because Chappelle is black, which actually makes them racists once again. That's even what they are literally saying. Blacks can't be racist, because minority. But blacks also can't be racist in Africa, because.... never got an answer for that.
I don't really give a shit about racists or whatever, I have a problem with hypocrites and liars.
Yup.
Why do you want to know the name of Q's user account?
You could claim that it's fake or controlled by admin anyway.
How would you verify that it's actually Qs and that it's not compromised?
I trust Jim.
>because that name was visible to all global volunteers on 8kun
How do you know that?
Maybe only Jim has access?
Are you a GV?
Let's even pretend that is the case, why do you think a GV would dox Q?
Or is it just about having a GV say - yes, that's the account? What would that change?
That the account is Qs? No.
How do you know that this GV is even real?
When you don't trust Jim at all, then you should not believe anything on this platform, because Jim has full control.
>I dont trust a single source of information about anything anon
It's Jim's platform.
Or:
Q's account name gets out.
Fagots will obviously try to get into the account.
Even asking for the name is not just pointless but a danger to OPSEC.
There is a reason why the board log was set to private.
>I have zero trust in Jim
Well, then I don't know why you are even here.
>I trust Q
Q obviously trusts Jim.
If you don't trust Jim, trusting in Q makes no sense, because everything literally everything on here can in theory be controlled or modified by Jim.
>was that place fucking "trustworthy"?
Ask yourself why Q went specifically here.
And Q also even said "disinformation necessary". Why do you trust someone saying that, saying literally that he, she it or they would lie?
In what do you trust in such case?
It would make more sense if you don't trust Jim nor Q. That would make at least some logical sense, but once again - I wouldn't be here if I didn't trust Jim.
Even the hivemind-Queue seems to trust Jim, because why else would that Queue post on Jim's platform, tell me.
Even posts using tripcodes, despite claims that tripcodes are compromised.
It makes no logical sense, simple as that.
Hey Queue, if this all is compromised, post another AF1 pic and go somewhere else, maybe onto Truth Social, hosted by the TRUSTworthy Cloudflare, that de-platformed 8ch.
>Here’s the thing… who benefits if they are real?
Does it even matter which Q is real and which is not? Maybe both are real. Maybe both are fake.
Funnily works perfectly with the content of the B post. Facts or Fiction.
Of course logic says that the hivemind-Q doesn't make sense at all. If this platform was compromised, and that's the only way for that narrative to work. The crew on here would not matter in this regard, then Q would not continue posting on this platform, but even that Q does.
I also would be very surprised if Q posted on the board with the ones that attacked this board over and over again. Makes no sense to me, but of course I may be wrong.
Murdering anyone is neither health nor care.
And harvesting the human at the same time is also neither health nor care.
Why are the girls that are getting harvested not even getting the money that is made with the body parts of the unborn human?
Are they getting informed what happens to these body parts?
Are they informed about how much money these so called companies are making?
This is about killing human beings.
And it's a man's baby as well.
If a woman is allowed to decide to kill her unborn child, why shouldn't a man be allowed to do the same?
It's his child too.
Without the man, there would be no child.
Sounds sexist to me.
Are you sexist?
In fact if killing unborn children is okay, why not allow killing of born children too. Let's say up to 12 years. A child can not really survive on its own for a long time.
Let's say the child is such a burden on the parents, why not allow the parents to kill the child as well? And let's reword that, call that a "late born abortion", a LBB, so that people's feelings aren't hurt. Murder is such an emotional word.