Replies

The motives of the Q skeptics are routinely trashed. Maybe once in a blue moon we’d be allowed to speak for ourselves?

First, I’ve seen Jerome Corsi do this exact thing before. He’s a smart guy and can be very persuasive. However, in the case I have in mind he was 100% wrong—and that was proven. The freepers who had jumped on Corsi’s bandwagon admitted he’d been proven wrong. It was a debacle.

Second, I visit other sites. I’ve seen Q mercilessly and brutally discredited both by the younger, tech savvy generation and by military posters. Is it possible, in your mind, that I have read their counter-Q arguments, assimilated them and deemed them to be of merit? Is it possible that I care about the truth, and that that is the issue underlying my comments?

I understand people's issues with Corsi, but why do you (and others like you) feel the need to show up on every thread and act like it is somehow a personal offense to you that others just see the situation differently? That there seems to be an almost evangelistic zeal to show the Q people how mislead they are? At the most basic level, I don't understand why it seems to bother you so; and you can't tell me it doesn’t, you are on here every night preaching about the lunacy of the Q's. Why do you care?

Second, I visit other sites. I’ve seen Q mercilessly and brutally discredited both by the younger, tech savvy generation and by military posters. Is it possible, in your mind, that I have read their counter-Q arguments, assimilated them and deemed them to be of merit? Is it possible that I care about the truth, and that that is the issue underlying my comments?

On paper, yes.

In practice -- on another thread within the last 2 or 3 days you posted a link to one of the other sites, I *think* it was a military one.

There were no persuasive arguments in that thread (remember, it was your link, so you chose which thread was presented). There was a great deal of snark, including a long post which mockingly presented, in an unfavorable, bombastic tome, the more extreme variants of / exaggerations of some of the interpretations of Q's posts.

Think of a member of the secular press describing The Rapture and Evangelistic doctrine on the last days & the second coming, or a TV anchor mocking a preacher for saying "he claims rock music has secret messages which make kids worship Satan" (as opposed to the actual claim of backward masking and sublminal messages normalizing the occult, not "making them" do anything) and you'll have a decent analogy.