skindoe

The term conspiracy theorist was designed for this purpose...

And how many men who are unbeknownst to you alone and completely struggling in the dating market have you seen but are conviently ignored for a couple flashy examples that stuck out in your mind?

He literally told people to stay peaceful...

Notice how only 1 post out of thousands by the so called Q we're shown in the making this article?

Notice how immediately they point to one case of violence which was denounced by Q. Seems like an attempt to emotionally connect Q with a single nutjob.

Do you think it would be fair to write articles about everyone based on the actions of a single supporter with clear mental illness? Why the double standard?

If what Q is saying is so dangerous then why not actually show that material and debunk it directly?

Just like the podesta emails the content is always completely ignored because the people writing these articles don't want you to be informed here. Ask yourself why? What is their agenda here? Is it in your best interest?

Read the drops qmap.pub and think for yourself.

If you haven't read any of the drops how can anyone take your opinion seriously on something you know nothing about?

Umm the one literally called plandemic that this entire thread is talking about...

So attributing views to her that she did not claim does not count either...

It does not sound like she made a claim regarding the efficacy of natural remedies rather questioning the default labeling of non profitable treatments as pseudoscientific junk.

If you define credible as being information coming from or being adjacent too the CDC/WHO/NIH opinion as many platforms are using as the defacto standard despite an extremely questionable history (understatement) of truthfulness (They praised Chinas openness to sharing information at the start of the virus...) then of course not.

Did you actually watch the video?

All the posts are viewable at Qmap.pub he posted less than 2 days ago. Encourage you to check it out.

What if Google and Twitter deside that those "alternatives" are hateful for disagreeing politically and stop linking them on their platforms making it extremely difficult/impossible to find them?

Don't you think if your going to attempt to argue against someone you should argue against what they actually said?

If so then why the double standard with Q there are dumb fans who post stupidity for literally everything. You would think people would actually quote the source (always ignored) instead of using a clear falacy of using ones followers to define them.

Sounds Orwellian

That's not the evidence you think it is. In sports analogies That would be the equivalent of brian windhorst tweeting out something and then you saying that it came "Directly from LeBron James".

People are not responsible for what their ignorant fans say.

What has Qanon ever said that can be remotely considered hateful?

Who determines what is hateful?