Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Political Issues' started by Agonizer, Jan 15, 2020.
January 20, 2020
Hackers targeted American Thinker after it put up a post about Q
By Andrea Widburg
On Tuesday, January 14, American Thinker put up an article entitled "An Introduction to Q." It was one of the site's most popular articles for several days. Since Tuesday, the American Thinker site and email account have been subject to several cyber-attacks. There's no way to tell whether the attacks are related to the post, but the timing is thought-provoking.
For almost three years, there's been word on the internet streets about "QAnon." Wikipedia — which is a great resource for uncontested information about historic events or people or such anodyne things as plant types, but a hard-Left domain for modern political information — introduces QAnon in the darkest way possible:
QAnon (/kjuːəˈnɒn/) is a far-right conspiracy theory detailing a supposed secret plot by an alleged "deep state" against U.S. President Donald Trump and his supporters. The theory began with an October 2017 post on the anonymous imageboard 4chan by someone using the name Q, a presumably American individual that may have later grown to include multiple people, claiming to have access to classified information involving the Trump administration and its opponents in the United States. Q has falsely accused numerous liberal Hollywood actors, Democratic politicians, and high-ranking officials of engaging in an international child sex trafficking ring, and has claimed that Donald Trump feigned collusion with Russians in order to enlist Robert Mueller to join him in exposing the ring and preventing a coup d'état by Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and George Soros. "Q" is a reference to the top-secret Q clearance. QAnon believers commonly tag their social media posts with the hashtag #WWG1WGA, signifying the motto "where we go one, we go all." (All hyperlinks stripped.)
That sounds scary, icky, and definitely conspiratorial.
Deborah Franklin, who wrote the American Thinker Q article, disagrees. In her article, she writes that there's good reason to believe that the Q phenomenon is not just a conspiracy theory by which confused, angry, and disaffected American conservatives try to explain why the Left has been successful in both politics and social policy.
Franklin explains that Q's hints, especially the way they tie together certain events and actions, have allowed Q followers to be a step ahead of world events, whether foreign or domestic. This prescience, Q supporters believe, proves that Q's cryptic pronouncements are not random predictions but are, in fact, solid advance intelligence.
Those who follow Q closely, says Franklin, believe that, rather than being a pajama-wearing loon playing head games from a suburban basement, Q is, in reality, a military intelligence operation. Its purpose is to help people understand the stories that Leftist media outlets reluctantly report with only minimal detail or biased spin.
The editors at American Thinker are agnostic about Q. They realize it's perfectly easy to read the Q phenomenon either way.
That is, QAnon can be nothing more than a fancy conspiracy theory. After all, the human mind is hardwired to find connections, even where none exists.
Alternatively, it could, in fact, be an intelligence operation laying a trail of crumbs that promise people that things that currently worry them — a transnational elite, a dishonest media establishment, and moral corruption in high places around the world — are not here permanently. Instead, Q promises that there is a plan to deal with these problems, with Trump's government at the center of that plan.
Ultimately, when looking at Q, it really can go either way.
But here's an interesting coincidence: since January 14, the day American Thinker published Franklin's take on Q, the site has experienced several attempted hacks, something that's never happened before.
On January 15, someone identified as from Ho Chi Minh City in Vietnam tried to get into American Thinker's email account. At the same time, the first person from American Thinker who tried to sign into the account was then locked out of his computer because malware was trying to install itself.
On January 17, another hacker attempted to get into the American Thinker email. Once again, thankfully, the system appeared to have foiled the attempt by shutting down before anything bad happened. On the same day, another editor at American Thinker watched a computer tied to that same email account abruptly die.
On January 19, the email system again stopped working, rebuffing people's attempts to sign in. This time, the attempt came from the Persian Gulf.
On January 20, the back-end of American Thinker was the subject of an attack, locking out the editors entirely. Fortunately, American Thinker has superb tech support, so the lockdown was quickly foiled.
As mentioned above, the human mind is hardwired to find connections, even where none exists. While that ability can occasionally lead us to the wrong places, it exists so that we can organize the chaos that is the world around us, enabling people to locate food and shelter and distinguish friend from foe. This could just have been American Thinker's week to get hacked, or American Thinker might have put a target on its back.
Nevertheless, just in case either Q is the real deal or Q's opponents are worried (or know) that Q is the real deal, American Thinker will continue to post occasionally about the Q phenomenon in order to keep readers informed about what's either a really cool military operation or a really persuasive, giant conspiracy hoax.
Maybe somebody is worried about Q?
Wikipedia is regarded as the word of God by so many. This is the Internet, and Wikipedia is read by so many, it must be accurate, right?
As I posted earlier in this thread, Wikipedia uses such trusted sites as ThinkProgress and the NYT as their sources. And worse, it has been shown that many agencies of the government edit its content, notably the FBI and the CIA. See: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...sed-for-wikipedia-edits-idUSN1642896020070816
Allus thot "Q" was an omnipotent being from "The Continuum."
Wikipedia is not a source, it's an aggregator. Any cites should be of the source material, not of the aggregator.
That's just what THEY want you to think.
No worse than the original post(s). It's really just a conspiracy by the folks at Reynolds Aluminium to boost tin foil sales
X22report on utube references Q and other various anons in its daily video post.
Real or not it is thought provoking.
Dave makes a compelling argument with comparing Q's posts to things that are happening. Many of his posts are later affirmed by Rush and others, a day or two later. He has been spot on with Sidney Powell and actions taken by the DS!
Like you say, very thought provoking and really makes me feel better. Sometimes, I do wonder though, if it is like Nostradamus's quatrains?
This thread and cited references therein make my head hurt.
Mine too, but the content sure is interesting. I can't imagine that there is not a group of people behind everything that goes on in the world. Maybe it's the deep state, or the Bildebergs (sp), or troop 4 of the boy scouts; who the heck knows?!
All I know is my head felt like The Twilight Zone, 4Chan, and Anonymous conceived a 3-way love child which exploded then right behind my eyes...
Q latest posts.
It's posts like those that lead me to conclude Q is just a bunch of jabbering that occasionally produces a statement that looks like insider info. There's no significant revelations here.
Everybody and their brother from pundits to the man on the street has been saying some version of post #1 for months. That one doesn't pass muster as high level insider knowledge.
On post two, are we to be surprised that the two most populous of the Democrat controlled states end up having their politicians as the party influencers? Would the Democrats' powerbase unravel if Republicans could miraculously flip CA or NY red while maintaining control of TX and FL? Thanks for that insight, Captain Obvious -- I mean, Q.
So leverage = rank among Democrats, huh? Shocking. I don't know of any other groups that function in such a way. (That was sarcasm. [For all the hyper-literalist readers on GT who constantly miss such things]).
Isn't it usually either money, talent, charisma, or power? The Democrats certainly aren't rising to power based on talent or charisma. And most of them get their money after getting into leadership positions. So, all that's left to them is leverage/power/control. Just like all the socialists & communists they emulate. This isn't news.
But good thing we have a man on the inside to reveal all this to us!