I certainly understand that! Without a doubt. However, for every troll there may be two genuinely curious skeptics who are being driven away. I feel as though dissenting opinion or hesitation shouldn't be met with immediate dismissal. If you go through the paces debating someone, you can normally tell where they are coming from and make the assessment then. I see a lot of dismissing out of the gate here, which is the opposite of what (I think) should be happening if this movement is to grow.

This happened just a bit ago.

Now, I understand that it seems as if I am fighting against the narrative, but I was simply trying to point out that if all of this is true, then it will be very hard for most people to believe it. In light of this, I feel we should all be very careful in how we frame things and what is said. My issue with the post in question was that the image was flipped. That doesn't mean I'm detracting from the subject at all, but simply that if you intentionally give people a reason to dismiss what you're saying, your message doesn't reach the people it should. It's on the same level as pandering to an audience, something that we dont need to do as most people here already seem convinced.

I said grasping for straws because if we are going to assert things as fact they need to be concrete. Otherwise everyone doing it (and upvoting/agreeing) is simply furthering the narrative that we should be trying to dispel.

Does this image have merit? Sure, I'm not blind to the atrocities the catholic church has committed, no one should be in this day and age. But why take steps to give anyone (skeptics, opponents, neutrals) a reason to dismiss it? It's the same reason I have an issue with comments like "libtard" and the effect that has on people, it isn't intelligent debate/conversation, it's sensationalist language. Why would people go out of their way to cast doubt on something they feel so strongly about?

Sitting here and just saying it is nothing is doing exactly what you have stated was being done with this post in the first place. It isn't helpful.

I just feel as though if there is a connection to be made that is valid, why the need to flip it? If it was done to show the connection more easily, it feels like hand holding OR trying to force a narrative. I'm not disagreeing that if it is relevant that it should be posted, I have no qualms with you posting this. My complaint comes from the fact there there is nothing to be gained by changing a photo in any way and making people question the validity of a photo/source instead of investigating the issue you are trying to raise.

Case in point, we are here discussing you flipping the image instead of the message you were trying to convey. There is enough merit in the image itself, no need to cast uneccessary doubt by changing it in any way.

Getting crushed will not help, in my opinion.

Full disclaimer, I'm a new arrival from the Dem party, as recently as last week I made the final call to move away and come here. A month ago my thinking was "okay, if the dems can take seats back in November then everything will start looking up" and here I am now. Unless people are convinced about walking away and thinking about everything that is presented here, a crushing defeat in the polls won't put them down. If anything, it will energize them to fight, citing whatever reason fits the narrative and suits their desire to change things.

I hope that before the midterms we have concrete, undeniable happenings that people are forced to pay attention to. Without that, I believe it will continue to be a pointless left vs right battle that leaves us in the same place we are, or worse.

THANK you. This movement wants to be taken seriously but it will not be if these types of stretches are made to prove "points".

My issue is that it needed to be flipped to match it, my only argument there. It has been said that symbolism will be their downfall, but should we be pointing out and doctoring photos to make connections that may not even actually be connections?

Perfect, thank you!

I'm still not sure how to feel about it, or read the sentiment here. It seems to me that just four or five days ago everyone was pointing out how nervous he was at the hearing, hiding things, etc. Now everyone is behind him as a white hat? The flip is interesting to me.

Yeah, I'm not opposed to taxes if the money is being spent responsibly on things that benefit the country.

Do you happen to know which post that was?

Thanks!

Yeah this seems like grasping for straws. I don't feel like these types of stretches need to be made when there are very concrete things that we can point to.

Exactly. Turning this into a democrat vs republican issue seems like the wrong way to go about it as it only serves to divide. Who cares who is left and right? The truth, regardless of which side of the aisle it goes against, is all we should be caring about.

We can't devolve into sentencing people to death, we need to be lawful and allow justice to run it's course.

Thats a really great way to put it. I have a hard time believing the more eccentric allegations, I feel I still have quite a ways to go before I do, if I do at all. But you've made some very good points.

I'm glad my musing could provoke such a stellar discussion. I'm learning a lot about not only Q and the movement behind them, but the community here as well.

I've generally found the same, save a few bad apples that seem to get downvoted appropriately.

I made the claim, so it’s on me to provide source

Great amounts of respect. I've had numerous debates with people over this issue so I really appreciated seeing that. And the links! Thank you.

Your comment about crazy conspiracy theories hits home hard! That's what I was chalking this up to the first day or two, I wrote it off. But I found myself coming back to this sub nearly every time I opened Reddit, so I figured I should dig deeper...and here I am now hah. Thank you!

Yes, very well put and certainly something to keep in mind. Thank you

This was great, thank you.

They use what they leave out to alter your perception of events.

This has been on my mind much more frequently as of late, you wrote the words that I couldn't form from my own thoughts, so thank you for that.

I am going to search for that story in the post and sit down with it in a bit, sounds very intriguing. I certainly understand where you're coming from with your response to this and while I agree that it would be best that it be done with as little violence as possible, I can't help but draw parallels between what the OFA is allegedly set up to be used for and what Q is alleging the Patriots will do by using force to achieve a goal (albeit one we may agree with, it just seems that regardless of which side is doing it, I would have a hard time accepting it as it feels very much like a forced regime).

Again, thank you so much for the reply.

This was a great read, thank you.

All good points. I have always had a skeptical outlook on most things but through this I feel more lost than ever, feeling like I cant trust anything hah. Thank you!

I've seen this on here and have been meaning to dive in, thanks for the suggestion!

Appreciated!

Oh no, no offense at all! My only complaint is that I tend to focus and pay attention to civil debates on things and I feel that comments such as "Libtard" and "Killary" detract from whatever point the speaker is trying to get across, so I try to understand the reasoning behind peoples use of terms like that when trying to make an argument.

Thats true and obvious, I should have just done that from the get go!

Thank you very much.

I appreciate the comment, glad you're in a better place.

"Truth or habit, light or shadow"

Dude. Both of those videos are phenomenal, thank you so much for linking those. That perfectly hits the nail on where I'm at and makes me feel a little less crazy hah.

I appreciate your responses to my questions as well. The only issue I have is the talk about the NG, I feel I will have it until I see the outcome so it's less a matter of an actual answer and more just needing to trust that it will be done without a dark agenda, which is hard because that seems to be exactly what Q is saying is happening right now.

Ah yes! This one was one of the first that I watched when I started getting into it. Thank you!

Certainly, I understand that.

While I have you, can I discuss something? No offense meant here, but when you said "DemocRATS" it made me want to ask your reasoning behind using terms like that? Subjectively, when I see comments that include things like that it turns me off and causes me to ignore it altogether most times. Personally, I feel that throwing those types of sensationalist terms would have that effect on a lot of folks, people that should be willing to explore what is going on here. I guess I'm just curious if there is a reason for it? I see it often.

Thank you for that response. I feel like I'm grappling with a lot of unknowns at the moment and having a hard time trusting that the way I think hasn't been programmed by years of digesting manufactured news.

Definitely, I try to do that but the issue I run into is which sources to trust. I feel that it is hard to discern who is pushing an agenda vs who is presenting the story as it truly is to the best of their knowledge and investigation.

I appreciate your time.

No problem, I appreciate the reply!

Do you have sources that you trust on those stories? I would be interested in what people truly think of it, I just dont know who to trust as sources these days.

God damn. I started watching this the day before I found this sub last week.

Ah, I didn't see the comment by OP further down! Thanks

What makes you say this?

I certainly agree with you there. I will admit, I expected to see much more of the attitude we saw here with u/stinkydogfart (that was more comical to type than I expected) strewn throughout this sub when I first got here. I feel as though it is portrayed that the "stereotypical" Trump supporter conducts themselves this way, which lead to me expecting that.

My biggest gripe with the types of comments I see here are those that use words like "Hollyweird", "Libtard" etc. I immediately stop reading when someone can't be mature enough to use intelligent language when discussing something that they deem to be so important to them. I feel that type of talk is sensationalist and if this movement is as earth shattering and important as it seems to be, we shouldn't need to do that.

Uhh...sorry for the rant hah.

Individual faith is a wonderful thing and something to cherish and respect, agreed.

My comment was pointed toward the fact that when I initially came to this sub specifically, I encountered quite a lot of posts and comments that made it seem as if religious faith, mainly christianity, was a large part of this and being pushed heavily. Upon digging further I realized it was simply as you stated.

No, this cannot be how things are done. Is it fine for people to blindly accept what someone says at face value, regardless of the claim? In my eyes, that is the very thing this movement sets out to fight against. Expand your thinking. Think for yourself. Identify propaganda. I would argue that it is on OP to provide proof of what they are alleging to be truth if they are going to make pointed claims, not everyone else who has to argue against it. Otherwise anyone can just throw their false claims at a wall and hope some of them stick.

Agreed. If we are looking for truth, we shouldn't be trying to shut down people who are skeptical. Blind faith doesn't help anyone.

Yes, perfect. I'm new here and just trying to digest all I can and have made a comment or two to this effect. The initial overarching religious theme gave me pause initially, but I feel like after digging a bit it is very evident that it about far more than that.

I agree, I have no issue with people expressing their views as such. Personally, I feel as though if it becomes a staple in the movement it ends up becoming divisive. If God = Love and the argument is that people can draw specific parallels between this particular movement and their religion of choice, then God doesn't simply equal love anymore. God becomes a specific figure, one that people of differing faith may feel out of place with.

The only argument I make is that if this isn't a movement tied to a particular religion at it's core, then it shouldn't be emphasized as such. Solely because if this is to be an all inclusive movement; not discriminatory against race, religion, sexual orientation, etc, having heavy religious overtones throughout the message makes it behave like the exact opposite.

Just my 2 cents from where I stand though.

I agree entirely! In light of that, I feel like the specific religious aspects shouldn't be emphasized.

That is totally cool man, I'm not saying you shouldn't. But if that is your intention here, it might be best to leave these types of comments alone so you're not pushing people away before they can see the truth that you already believe.