Lausten: “Does he really think that social media DOESN’T fuel misinformation and ISN’T threatening to erode acceptance of the results that will eventually be published? If he isn’t trying to erode that acceptance is a what is he trying to do?”
Player: I cant believe that someone who calls himself educated wrote this and presents as a skeptic. To question the narrative they are asking you to accept when facts arent clear, events unexplianed is a not welcome by you?
3point already explained what “skeptical” means, so no need to repeat that. Applying it, and repeating myself with a little clarification; questioning something is fine but you (via Martin) made a claim. I welcome questions but I quote the conclusion you support below. A claim requires evidence. You keep stating there is an “official story”. Officially by what official? Who signed off on it? What we have are scattered facts being reported within hours of the event. A good skeptic would be skeptical of those facts. A good skeptic would not expect to have evidence that the Clintons did it at this point.
Here’s the claim, “ Epstein was either murdered by an assailant or allowed (and perhaps strongly encouraged) to commit suicide.” Really? What’s your evidence?
"This news. Do you 3 point accept the offical story???"
"This news" means nothing and has no context, so what am I accepting? Whatever "This news" is, I might or might not agree with it and I am within my rights to withhold judgement until I know more. Please explain yourself more in your posts- stop trying to get away with the fewest words and minimal punctuation, as you are failing in both areas and your posts are too much like random incomplete thoughts than anything we can respond to.
If you mean news about Trump, like I’ve said many many many many times, almost everything he tweets and says and does is either wrong, uninformed, a lie, rude, or a mixture of these. So I am within my rights to believe whatever makes sense when measured against the unadulterated reality of Trump. If I am wrong, then I will change my mind.
“This news” means nothing and has no context, so what am I accepting? Whatever “This news” is, I might or might not agree with it and I am within my rights to withhold judgement until I know more. Please explain yourself more in your posts- stop trying to get away with the fewest words and minimal punctuation, as you are failing in both areas and your posts are too much like random incomplete thoughts than anything we can respond to.
You really have outdone yourself here. We have just spend the last 10 odd posts on epstein and you claim ignorance. Maybe you are just plain ignorant on the world around you.
So then. I try again. Do you 3point believe the official narrative that epstein death was a suicide? Could i make that any clearer?
“Here’s the claim, “ Epstein was either murdered by an assailant or allowed (and perhaps strongly encouraged) to commit suicide.” Really? What’s your evidence?”
I don’t know the truth of the situation any more or less than you do. Also, I don’t believe any news with 100% confidence.
However, regarding the death of Epstein:
I believe that the news reports are correct when they report what the officials say (if there's a mistake, it's the official not the reporter),
I believe the officials are, on average, telling the truth to the best of their ability (read that again to make sure you understand it),
I believe there are probably things we won't ever know, but those things will be details more than significant facts that change the main story (most conspiracy theories are completely wrong),
The idea of a conspiracy involving the Clintons is so unlikely that it's not on my radar as a possible part of the story,
I might be wrong on any or all of the points above (let's wait for more credible information),
The story will evolve and change as more details come out, so no one should jump to conclusions (these stories always become more clear over time, so lets let some time pass instead of getting mad at nothing).
I just got back from four days of camping with no wifi or radio and have played ball and gone out for supper at friends the last two nights, so I honestly out of the loop on most current events, especially the Epstein case.
Two pages ago Epstein was mentioned, and since then Trump was mentioned a few times. I am sorry to have not know what you were referring to.
People here are giving you much more time and feedback than you really deserve.
When I read your responses (or really, your attacks), I’m reminded of the way a Chihuahua yipes away at a Great Dane or a Mastiff, as if he’s soooo big.
But with you, it’s brains. You think you are brilliant, and “onto” something the rest of us are too stupid to see, but your confidence is cringeworthy. You just aren’t as intelligent and knowledgeable as you believe you are.
Oh, I wanted to ask you, @Player…How DO you decide what to believe and what not to believe? Is it that you only believe what you see in socialist sources, and automatically dismiss anything you see publicized anywhere else? (Because it doesn’t take much intelligence or knowledge or discernment to do that.)
:Oh, I wanted to ask you, @player…How DO you decide what to believe and what not to believe? Is it that you only believe what you see in socialist sources, and automatically dismiss anything you see publicized anywhere else? (Because it doesn’t take much intelligence or knowledge or discernment to do that.)"
You havent given me one reason why its a flawed analysis and why your ideology marries up with reality in so much as why world event happen.
Player you attacked some comment that I made, you said about “Warren and ratings”. You said that it made you laugh. I looked and looked and couldn’t find what you were referring to. (Was it something from another thread? If so why didn’t you specify? Do you intentionally fail to communicate with clarity?) That is another example of how useless it is (and how much a waste of time and energy it is) to try to communicate with you.
I do say things that I mean to be funny, sometimes. But my guess is that you had some delusional preconception that was in conflict with whatever my comment was, and you had to cognitively support your delusional preconception and laugh at my thoughts so as to protect your wee psyche.
Player, Let’s take a look at your last sentence posted: “You havent given me one reason why its a flawed analysis and why your ideology marries up with reality in so much as why world event happen.”
That is a fatally poorly constructed sentence. For me, it is not so much your frequent off base analyses that are so problematic. You are not the only person in the world who has similar off base views of reality. What bugs me is your consistently sub par construction of phrases, sentences, etc. such, that whatever the hell you meant to communicate is lost in your own universe.
Again I say, you said “…and why your ideology marries up with reality in so much as why world event happen.” That is not coherent. You think you are communicating, but you’re not.
Timb - see what i mean. Why do you have to be so dishonest? You know what i am talking about as you took exception (somewhat) to my response " tax hikes??"
Player, If I “took exception” it was to not knowing what the hell you are talking about, and to wasting my time looking for and trying to figure out what the hell you were talking about.
Stop accusing me of being dishonest. I am not. In fact dishonesty disgusts me. That is one of the reasons Trump disgusts me so much (as he is a liar extraordinaire).
You really have outdone yourself here. We have just spend the last 10 odd posts on epstein and you claim ignorance. Maybe you are just plain ignorant on the world around you.
This was not clear to me either. You are well known for switching subjects in mid thread. You have used multiple examples of news items. Sure, Epstein was prominent in recent posts, but you really need to reflect on your communications skills. We can't read your mind.
I was listening to 1A on NPR on the ride home. I found out they are keeping the conspiracy count open for investigation, despite the death of Epstein, and they (i.e. Barr) have spoken openly about concerns of “irregularities” at the jail. In other words, they are calling this a conspiracy and investigating it. But that’s not going to be good enough for folks like Player.