>>9228281 pb
Anons shy away from topics that never see a follow up from Q.
Why should we be okay with LV and Parkland?
Anons would bitch about it, if it happened during Hussein's presidency.
But under Trump (and Q)?
Anons won't touch the subject.
For fear that that would count as "shilling" or would be not trusting…
> Wish I could pinpoint when questioning "our side" became a no no.
This always happens, when a group is attacked or ridiculed from the outside.
To not break apart, the members of the group suspect every critical voice to be another potential enemy.
This mechanism leads to groupthink and to cultlike structures eventually.
This is not a desirable development.
And Q is furthering this development.
I am not here to change from a critical former 4chan Anon to a come-what-may-Q-follower.
I need to stay a thinking reader of Q's post and a critical analyst of how Q's post reflect what I'm seeing happening in real life/ or not happening in real life.
Can't live in a fantasy parallel universe.
Trump tweeted several time "Plague".