Censorship is worse than half truths imo.
All of a sudden are pro censorship when it comes to the article? What the fuck.
The only problem I see with the article is they have no idea how the chans work and they give the impression that Q is the bakers and BO/BVs and the source of Q drops
The more I read it the more it looks like AIMfaggotry.
The article is littered with red flags. Someone is trying to define the movement instead of investigating the issues. AIMfaggots, the same ones who played golf with Alex Jones no doubt
OK good feedback, I will do a few more. bt overall my analysis is that this article is meant to paint a picture of the Q movement as a paranoid right wing cult of personality with christian overtones.
Q is also a fictional character on star trek, james bond, the second least common letter of the alphabet, but since Q started posting as Q-Level patriot the likely meaning is thought to be Q is military intelligence with Q level clearance.
I never claimed to know why Q chose the name, don't strawman me here.
Q earliest posts were as Anonymous and inside a board titled Bread crumbs - Q level Patriot, go back to the old Q maps and confirm this yourself
I'm pointing out red flags. I'm also not telling people not to read it. I am against censorship.
I don't think it's all that notable, this should be stuff that stands out to any anon who reads the article. I think someone is trying to be the gatekeeper to the Q movement and send people in here with a certain expectation
If you want to and you agree something is not right with the article, sure. take all the graphics, reword them, I don't care. All I am trying to do is get the point across this article doesn't pass the smell test for me. I'm not for censorship. People need to read it and compare it to what we know.
I think he's just trying to establish a no-awoo perimeter.
I was about to say, BO got quiet, I bet he's actually reading the article now.