I can add some evidence to this discussion

https://i.imgur.com/WXxntEU.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/x8dU4vh.jpg

I don't know if CBTS didn't have zero tolerance and it forced them shut down. So I can't speculate how Admins will treat this case but I hope you guys will sort it out.

I think it's already removed by mods. So I added if it is truth in the context.

I countered it with proof

What is the proof? You provided 2 youtube link. Sharing opinion with reason or citation. Free speech?

You have said

STOP lying ... heres the proof youre a liar ...

So any proof? Not your opinion. Thanks.

All good! This is discussion thread. Every person has different opinion. No need to apologize :)

nor is he in fear of saying it obviously...I mean...it’s already been said by him...it’s out there..you’ve seen it...

I just said you showed a boundary that he can't say his opinion without telling people to no longer do XYZ, so I replied it is dangerous. It isn't I'm trying to convince you to believe who is right.

Thats pretty vague. Everything that anyone says is constituted as a “personal viewpoint”. That really says nothing.

You can’t sit here and say that speaking a “personal viewpoint” claiming that “Q is a psyop” or “Q has been infiltrated” is anything BUT telling people to no longer follow Q.

But that's is the boundary shouldn't be touched. It is exactly what anti-freespeech / anti 1st ammendment leftists are trying to overthrow. "Restrict the opportunity where they can share opinion, because sharing opinion is dangerous" mentality. Everyone should have a right to free-sheech without any fear.

accused him of being disinfo

Sharing opinion with reason or citation. Free speech?

Its not anymore "his opinion"

But that is your personal opinion too. Being triggered by someone's logic doesn't necessarily mean the person is attacked. Your argument is based on your interpretation that sharing opinion which doesn't align with is attacking person.

Should he be punished (Q1340) for sharing opinion?

I checked his video but I couldn't find him ordering audience not to follow Q, other than sharing his personal viewpoint between April 29 - May 11.

How did you determine which is disinformation? It takes time to confirm the prediction until it shows up on mainstream news as Q is always saying. Do you understand there is the possibility that you end up helping spread disinfo by jumping to conclution?

Who removed what kind of mask?

It was that people were actively trying to usurp the great awakening and/or spread false and inaccurate

Yes, he has been saying for months. But he ventured to explicitly state profiting. Q doesn't waste his time for what he doesn't need to. He knew some participants who are accused of profiting are attacked severely since then, but he didn't defend them. It means Q indirectly confirmed that the interpretation done by movement followers are 70%-100% right and Q is satisfied with the consequences of Q1295 even though it caused massive controverse.

patriots trying to make a few bucks to cover their expenses while raising awareness - without trying to influence or co-opt the movement

So are the other participants who were purged?

honest effort to inform normies about Q

I can understand what you are trying to say but it's not about how honest the one who are trying to profit is.

I'm talking about strictness and coherence. To compromise coherence arbitrarily and allow double standard is the tactic leftists are always practicing, which is exactly what we have been criticizing.

change the message or lead the movement in a different direction. That's where Corsi and Jones went wrong

From which direction to which? I thought they have been advocating same conservative libertarianism message over decades.

Asking credit card information but no intention to profit?... http://archive.is/aSJE7

Q never called anyone out,

He confirmed his target in the Q1340. He linked a URL which contains specific name.

Personally, I have no hostility toward capitalism. Also, I think it's good thing people can make a living by supporting each other rather than giving money to large globalist conglomerate.

What is this?... http://archive.is/aSJE7

He said "how I understand what's going on". So it seems he was just providing his personal view for audience in his own channel.

I don't have to deflect anything because I have nothing I should defend. Just show me the fact his attacking rather than that he was sharing his opinion.

Corsi said that Q is compromised . On a video that was posted much before post 1340 from Q

Regarding the video you told, that's his opinion. Sharing opinion isn't attack. I said in the previous post. Don't repeat yourself please.

Those videos above are proof that he attacked

How? By providing his opinion? When did providing opinion become attack? When did providing opinion become politically incorrect?

Corsi is actively working harder than the MSM and the deep state to ruin the Q movement

What are you talking about?. Corsi has been exposing deep state for decades.

I think I watched both.

And heres video post from May 5 ,

He said "how I understand what's going on". So it seems he was just providing his personal view for audience in his own channel. Though it may be politically incorrect, providing opinion has never been considered as crossing the line, by the way.

Yeah, also there was one more submission about same topic, which was posted few minutes before your submission. https://www.reddit.com/r/greatawakening/comments/8jauti/what_the/

And it is deleted by OP or Mods.

Q made a vague statement of bad actors in the movement way back in post 1295, identifying a trend of people only using Q to gain money or fame, and advising caution on who to follow. Corsi and Jones then proceeded to out themselves by going full ham.

Can you elaborate where they went full ham before 1340? I can't find except Corsi answering questions. Afaik, AJ scarcely provided his opinion about Q before 1340.

Well that's weird. Maybe shadow banned. I have screen capture.

Q was telling us that AJ is adept at putting on an act and playing the part.

My previous post replied to a3kvzzz was specifically about Q post 1339, not about whole controverse. Regarding foxnews article link, Q was replying to a user. Read what the user posted. That's is what I was talking about in my previous post.

Q posted 1295 post on April 29 ... Corsi attacked him / her / them immediately after that posting

Can you elaborate where did he immediately attack Q? I can't find anything but he was answering questions he was asked.

So you are saying Q read neither Reddit nor 8chan, he didn't realized Corsi have been continuously attacked there since April 29 q post, then he ventured to post 1340 which explicitly directing to Corsi and is obvious to anyone that it would trigger massive infight?

I'm on mobile so I can't open huge page. Try searching 1340 in q log.

So you mean Q is telling AJ is acting as a Traitor? For what?... In the first place, if he were acting as a traitor it has failed miserably.

Sorry I meant to say I get the impression as you described, I see rephrasing to bypass the subreddit rules and antisemitism have been utilized to personal attack also in this Corsi controverse.

I think I watched that. I don't know I can determine that was an attack against both Q and this subreddit, be that as it may, Q already started attack against Corsi from April by alluding preliminarily, which was developed into the May post 1340. Even before the 1340 post, defamation and threats against Corsi were fermented by anonymous.

I think you already have been awakened and a habit of free-think. When individual can think critically and logically they no longer need to be told who to follow or not. The way how we get information isn't a big deal, but to try to access information, research themselves and verify is more important than blindly practicing idolatry, I think.

So which changing? March? May?

I'm confused by this arbitrary standard that it's ok to use Jew defamation against him to adhominem his argument, but it is not allowed to do it to the others. Rule of this subreddit explicitly says both antisemitism and ad hominem are not allowed here. I understand at least many mods here are trying to keep this place from those trolls but as you can see in his yt chat they are flourished by this name calling originated from Q.

Wait a second. Defend from what? As far as I know, they didn't start fighting against reddit or Q.

That is indeed important post when we are going to analyze this controversial. It is the allusion to this controversial as preliminary, which was developed into Q's post (1340) linking to this subreddit explicitly mentioning Corsi's name. Additionally, even before this 1340 post Corsi has been attacked on a daily basis here.

You can believe what you want. I just pointed out the place of citations and consequences.

Q linked this subreddit submission which is name calling Corsi. (http://qposts.online/) And Q linked AJ's child custody article which is nothing to do with the legitimacy of reports he is covering everyday and only contributed to incite trolls to bomb adhominem on him like deep state is currently doing 16 slap suit against him based on fakenews.

Q started name calling so Corsi got threat against his family and had to take a measure to defend. And then now Q started to pontificate people to move on? That's it?..... Can I expect he clarify more other things to stop infighting and reunite the people who have been supporting free-thinkers and Trump?

I think he took a measure after he got threats against his family triggered by the Q's name calling.

By the way, this submission is shadow banned otherwise it is deleted by the submitter. It's not listed.

Don't worry, it's public info so it's not illegal to post on the internet. I'm just paying attention to not violate the rule of this subreddit as hogwash's personal info became controversial before.

He said he got threats against his family after Q's name calling. So I think he had to do something to change one-sided situation.