You see Paul, what normal people do is weigh up all sides of the argument and see what holds up in terms of data,statistics etc etc and then stand for what they believe to be the most likely scenario based off of those investigations.
You on the other hand try to sit on the fence and dangle your legs, often having a bias towards all official sources and also trying to follow their narrative.
Numerous people here have tried to show you the error of your ways and generally you cling to your belief. I think this is the first time I. 3 years I have seen you post anything on the other side of the argument.
I must conclude that you have bias and are not a fair "internet journalist" (hahahaha), often portraying the official narrative as being the correct one when it's quite obvious to those of us that stood against it that the whole thing was bullshit.
Anyway, refreshing to see you post the other side of it for a change.
Cunty 1 points 3 months ago
You see Paul, what normal people do is weigh up all sides of the argument and see what holds up in terms of data,statistics etc etc and then stand for what they believe to be the most likely scenario based off of those investigations.
You on the other hand try to sit on the fence and dangle your legs, often having a bias towards all official sources and also trying to follow their narrative.
Numerous people here have tried to show you the error of your ways and generally you cling to your belief. I think this is the first time I. 3 years I have seen you post anything on the other side of the argument.
I must conclude that you have bias and are not a fair "internet journalist" (hahahaha), often portraying the official narrative as being the correct one when it's quite obvious to those of us that stood against it that the whole thing was bullshit.
Anyway, refreshing to see you post the other side of it for a change.