Qanon Conspiracy theories

Status
Not open for further replies.
Childlike Empress said:
My goodness, Horatius, you really have to answer that question? Never watched a film about the mafia? How they only accept new people into their ranks if they prove themselves by doing certain heinous acts like murdering someone?
Click to expand...

In reality most Mafia members are taken down using tax or financial law. Not many accountants are required to shoot people before picking up a client who may be in the Mafia.
 
Childlike Empress said:
My goodness, Horatius, you really have to answer that question? Never watched a film about the mafia? How they only accept new people into their ranks if they prove themselves by doing certain heinous acts like murdering someone? To make sure that this person will stay loyal to the "company" because these acts are horrible in the public view and the company will make sure to have evidence of them? It isn't that hard a concept to get and it is the same in this scenario, true or not.
Click to expand...

So which way round is it, CE?
Does a Satan-worshipping paedophile realise that their only way to success and acceptance is to run for President of the United States? This would seem odd, because obviously this kind of career involves an emormous amount of public exposure. Everything you do is broadcast around the world, your every move and word is pored over, you are filmed everywhere you go, surrounded by staff 24/7, and your entire past history is gone over with a fine tooth comb.
If you wanted to conceal your dreadful perversion, this surely would be the worst of all possible ways to do it.
Then there's the alternative, which is that, in order to gain admittance to the inner circle, you must become a Satanic paedophile. This again beggars belief. Sexual orientation is fixed at an early age. I don't see how you can choose to become a paedophile overnight, just to further your career. Plus the sudden conversion to Satanism.
Are we really expected to believe that, in all the years this is supposed to have been going on, that not one candidate refused? JFK? Jimmy Carter? Lincoln? No-one? Not one unsuccessful and disgruntled person decided to bring the whole show to an end by becoming a whistleblower? Not one of them had any sort of moral scruples of any kind?
As I say, CE: you choose. Be sure to back up your case with evidence.
 
Childlike Empress said:
My goodness, Horatius, you really have to answer that question? Never watched a film about the mafia? How they only accept new people into their ranks if they prove themselves by doing certain heinous acts like murdering someone? To make sure that this person will stay loyal to the "company" because these acts are horrible in the public view and the company will make sure to have evidence of them? It isn't that hard a concept to get and it is the same in this scenario, true or not.
Click to expand...

Is this from the movies, from fiction? Who are the bad guys, got any names - is this Hilary, or Trump (aka clownstick).
 
Childlike Empress said:
My goodness, Horatius, you really have to answer that question? Never watched a film about the mafia? How they only accept new people into their ranks if they prove themselves by doing certain heinous acts like murdering someone? To make sure that this person will stay loyal to the "company" because these acts are horrible in the public view and the company will make sure to have evidence of them? It isn't that hard a concept to get and it is the same in this scenario, true or not.
Click to expand...

I see you don't know much about organized crime other than what you saw in movies.
 
Big Q meetup today in DC. Grifters trying to extract a few more handfuls of cash before all the Q believers start pretending it was a joke all along and they never really believed it.
 
Childlike Empress said:
My goodness, Horatius, you really have to answer that question? Never watched a film about the mafia? How they only accept new people into their ranks if they prove themselves by doing certain heinous acts like murdering someone? To make sure that this person will stay loyal to the "company" because these acts are horrible in the public view and the company will make sure to have evidence of them? It isn't that hard a concept to get and it is the same in this scenario, true or not.
Click to expand...

If you're relating Q and their ******** to mafiosi you missed the boat.
 
BStrong said:
If you're relating Q and their ******** to mafiosi you missed the boat.
Click to expand...

Axxman300 said:
First rule of the mafiosi: Keep your mouth shut.

First Rule of Q: Blah, blah,blah, blah...
Click to expand...


99074d54b459448e8.gif
 
Childlike Empress said:
My goodness, Horatius, you really have to answer that question? Never watched a film about the mafia? How they only accept new people into their ranks if they prove themselves by doing certain heinous acts like murdering someone? To make sure that this person will stay loyal to the "company" because these acts are horrible in the public view and the company will make sure to have evidence of them? It isn't that hard a concept to get and it is the same in this scenario, true or not.
Click to expand...

His point is if the rich and powerful are into buggering little kids then why not shape the law to allow such conduct. As he points out the evolution of public acceptability has gone the other way, not just from the Ancient Greek and Roman cultures. Age of consent laws in the US have risen from as low as 14 to 18 almost across the board. NAMBLA has been chased under ground.

How is Q consistent with the real world?

Look at what Trump has done to change environmental laws to favor big business. Look at how Uber has bought enough influence to exempt itself from the laws that apply to Taxi services. Q wants people to believe that those in power and those in the entertainment industry would rather do dirty deeds in secret instead of using their influence to shape the culture into something more pedo-friendly. That's unrealistic.
 
Childlike Empress said:
:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

What you are not getting is that people here value your input just as much as they do Q anon. The end result is that regardless of your objective, your opinions are not to be taken as serious attempts to communicate anymore than a fictional mafia movie can be seen as similar to a fact filled documentary.
 
Matthew Ellard said:
In reality most Mafia members are taken down using tax or financial law.

Not many accountants are required to shoot people before picking up a client who may be in the Mafia.
Click to expand...

Over the years that ceased to be the case.

Between active authorized FBI wiretaps/bugging and the propensity of individuals facing serious prison time to trade off knowledge for time, all of the major figures that went to trial and were convicted over the last 30 - 40 years went down on felony crimes and conspiracy charges.

It is interesting that way back when Mickey Cohen got nabbed and convicted twice for income tax evasion - for a resourceful fella he was awful careless.
 
Cosmic Yak said:
So which way round is it, CE?
Does a Satan-worshipping paedophile realise that their only way to success and acceptance is to run for President of the United States? This would seem odd, because obviously this kind of career involves an emormous amount of public exposure. Everything you do is broadcast around the world, your every move and word is pored over, you are filmed everywhere you go, surrounded by staff 24/7, and your entire past history is gone over with a fine tooth comb.
If you wanted to conceal your dreadful perversion, this surely would be the worst of all possible ways to do it.
Then there's the alternative, which is that, in order to gain admittance to the inner circle, you must become a Satanic paedophile. This again beggars belief. Sexual orientation is fixed at an early age. I don't see how you can choose to become a paedophile overnight, just to further your career. Plus the sudden conversion to Satanism.
Are we really expected to believe that, in all the years this is supposed to have been going on, that not one candidate refused? JFK? Jimmy Carter? Lincoln? No-one? Not one unsuccessful and disgruntled person decided to bring the whole show to an end by becoming a whistleblower? Not one of them had any sort of moral scruples of any kind?
As I say, CE: you choose. Be sure to back up your case with evidence.
Click to expand...

Bump for CE.
If you could respond, and with something more than an emoji, that would be nice.
 
Q wants people to believe that those in power and those in the entertainment industry would rather do dirty deeds in secret instead of using their influence to shape the culture into something more pedo-friendly. That's unrealistic.

-Axxman
Click to expand...

It appears they are doing both.

Why wouldnt they do both?

Except for the dirtiest, their dirty deeds will become more acceptable to the frogs, boiling. An example is Their Media parading 11 year old Desmond Is Amazing on morning TV shows. Like gateway drugs. "Drag Queens in Libraries" (storytelling, for children) is another example, with one of them proudly proclaiming they are grooming the next generation. See how it works?

One pic showed a drag queen lying supine on a library floor with children lying on top of him. Grooming, apparently
 
Last edited:
Bubba said:
It appears they are doing both.

Why wouldnt they do both?

Except for the dirtiest, their dirty deeds will become more acceptable to the frogs, boiling. An example is Their Media parading 11 year old Desmond Is Amazing on morning TV shows. Like gateway drugs. "Drag Queens in Libraries" (storytelling, for children) is another example, with one of them proudly proclaiming they are grooming the next generation. See how it works?

One pic showed a drag queen lying supine on a library floor with children lying on top of him. Grooming, apparently
Click to expand...


I think this has already been addressed. Perhaps you missed this post:

Horatius said:
This is the part I don't get: if the people in power really are part of an "ancient sex and death cult", and routinely engage in "multi-generational abuse of children", why is it that all forms of abuse against children have only become less acceptable and more illegal over time? Beating your kids used to be routine. Using kids for sexual purposes was widespread and public in places like Ancient Greece and Rome, and common in many other times and places. Hell, most places didn't even have laws against child pornography until incredibly recently. Child marriages were enshrined in many religions and societies.


If these people really were all that interested in child abuse, they had it. They had it all. Why did they ever let it go?
Click to expand...

This business about drag queens in libraries is new to me, though. Not sure what the connection between transvestism and child abuse is. Are you claiming there is one?

Got a link? You clearly have unorthodox browsing habits, by the way: my own news feeds have never featured this. Is there something you wish to share with the group? :D
 
If you want someone to dress up like a sparkling Disney Princess and amaze your kids for hours with theatrical animation and self-positivity messaging, you want a drag queen.

Sad Clowns, Stepford Wives, and Soccer Moms can just sit right the hell down and take notes.
 
I've seen all sorts of odd persons in libraries, and taken a bunch of kids to story times, but somehow, even though I live in Vermont where they would hardly raise an eyebrow, I've never run across a drag queen. My stepson is a librarian and he hasn't either. What's wrong with us? Are we out of touch, or do we need to move closer to the Bible Belt to find a place where fundie preachers do their drag queening in the one place they can depend on their followers never seeing them? Inquiring minds want to know! Where are these vaunted drag queens? Do they specialize in particular stories? The Red Shoes? The Tailor of Gloucester? The 500 Hats of Bartholomew Cubbins?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom