My impression both from the videos and from right-wing twitter in the lead-up to this event, is that some q believers thought that various government and military leaders were going to step in, expose, and arrest members of the "deep state". Some of the more out there ones thought that the "deep state" leaders would be executed for treason. They're insane, as is par for the course in American politics, but weren't attempting a violent revolution. The rhetoric of "stop the steal" was wholly consistent with that of "the resistance".
The gulf between what you perceive and what I saw is far too great a chasm to cross.
If we carried on, it'd probably get heated or it'd end up being a massive wasted effort.
I've been through this rodeo too many times before. I spend the effort to go find objective sources that prove the claims I make only to be met with shifting goal posts and denialism.
For example the link literally describing the PB getting declared a terrorist organization. We're just hand waving that one away are we?
Anyways ... That was a rhetorical question. I've seen the way this all goes.
In order to preserve my own sanity and respect the sanctity of hackernews' no flamewars policy I'm just going to tell you that I disagree and wish you a peaceful day.
I feel the same. That song and dance gets old. My goal wasn't to come to an agreement, but to introduce a different perspective in a largely one-sided discussion.
> For example the link literally describing the PB getting declared a terrorist organization. We're just hand waving that one away are we?
It's kind of downstream from this discussion, no? That designation is contingent on the facts that we were directly debating.
> In order to preserve my own sanity and respect the sanctity of hackernews' no flamewars policy I'm just going to tell you that I disagree and wish you a peaceful day.
Thank you, you too. I know we aren't able to reconcile, but I do appreciate engaging with the other side on a more civil forum.