Qanon has hoovered up almost every type you can imagine, some well established long before the first "Q-drop". From pizzagate and 9-11, through chemtrails and 5G-nanochips, to flat-earth and alien overlords, with everything in between.
Sure. And all of those conspiracy theories are allowed and even promoted. Russia interfered in the elections to get Trump in office. There's a pee tape. etc. all encouraged or officially endorsed. That the Hunter Biden laptop is real and that it details family corruption was and continues to be suppressed. That Victoria Nuland had at least one call intercepted in which she was discussing who should be in the new Ukrainian government, that Biden threatened to withhold a billion dollar loan to the Ukraine unless the prosecutor that was investigating Burisma which had taken Hunter onto its and was writing cheques to for no apparent expertise etc... these are bad conspiracy theories that get you banned on social media, get your payment processors to dump you and are drowned out by the other conspiracy theories. That Syria gassed its own people or that Russia sabotaged its own pipeline that it controls the valve to in order to ... what? prevent Germany from buying gas which Russia wants to sell it but that Germany won't buy because the US has told them not to? Why is Q-Anon stuff not getting blocked in the same way? The conspiracy that "the system" perpetuates itself (and its oppression) by gatekeeping who is a woman and who is a man based on genitals so we need to trans children - is doing fine and disagreeing with it will get you kicked off of social media. Why?
Except that every single one one of those is alive and kicking in the Qanon community. They're not bad, nor banned. They're pretty mainstream in that environment.
I don't mean in Qanon cirlces. I mean what is allowed for the public.
Even then, an argument could be made that Qanon is so widespread that it's a lot more "public" than any stand-alone conspiracy theory gets, whether "allowed" or not.
I forgot to reply to this at the time. It probably would've went along predictable lines of it clearly not being allowed as it has been mostly banned and purged from Twitter, YT & FB for around two years now. And you no doubt would have explained that's not what you meant by allowed. However, part of my point could be moot soon anyway as Musk looks to be buying Twitter after all. He's claimed free speech as a motivation so maybe he'll allow Qanon back on and the big accounts will be openly Tweeting again.
Well, I've been banned from twitter for a while now so I don't know what's going on there anymore - yet you seem to be able to always dredge up some Qanon gem from twitter so I make the assumption that Qanon in general is still OK - though now that I have googled it looks like 70k or so accounts have been banned. Then again, people who say that men cannot actually be turned into women also get banned. It's really had to say what kind of crazy is OK on allowed on twitter but - being true - probably probably counts against any particular post.
Most of it originates on Truth, Gab, Parler or Telegram these days. Hardly any of it comes directly from Twitter. Perhaps more amusingly, not that much seems to originate on 8kun nowadays either. Truth is probably the busiest forum for it currently, with the Donald embracing it more than ever. I only follow one account - Trump - but I see loads of Qanon stuff simply because he "re-truths" it.
I don't really see that on Twitter or FB. Getting banned seems a bit more random there. I've been suspended from both numerous times, usually for no apparent reason. That said, it could apply to Truth. Perhaps ironically, being "true" appears to be almost irrelevant to "Truth".
Indeed he did. Costly junk by the look of things, although who knows if it will actually cost the bold Alex a penny.*
Whatever the "conspiracy theories" may have been, he was still profiting from making stock trades based on inside info on legislation his wife was helping to pass. Maybe people get hammer-attacked sometimes because they are doing actually bad things.
I haven't been following it too closely, is this the claimed motive?
He was after Nancy. There are lots of sane reasons to want to get rid of her, but if you're going to try something like that it's best to have an insane reason handy.
Perhaps there are. However, are there any sane reasons for breaking into her house at two in the morning and attacking her elderly husband? Unless Nancy has directly and seriously harmed the 42 year old suspect, his breaking into her house and ultimately smashing a frail 80 something on the nut with a hammer, whilst demanding to see the wife, strikes me as at least a little unhinged. Certainly not the type of behaviour I'd be looking to play down or attempt to rationalise.
Textbook Qrackpot:
Five years on from the first Q drop and it's still inspiring nutters to commit violence.
