US Politics

Stirlingsays said:
It's bonkers but he can't admit fault in supporting this nonsense at the time and if I remember correctly it's of note that he was the only person who supported the theory on here.

I don't criticise not taking what happened at face value, as I think that's always valid. Not that he appears to support people doing that for anything else apparently....covid I'm looking at you.

However, once you look into it.... nothing he supported makes much sense.....and that's worthy of criticism. He appears to have believed it because he preferred to.

What he suggests would have required the collusion of Trump's security team in letting him cut his own ear on the ground, that collusion would also have to include the sniper team in letting the event happen before ending it before another volley. Plus the collusion or required incompetence of the examining doctor.

Even more of a stretch is the reality of the people behind Trump who were shot with one dying. Not only does it prove that real bullets were fired but that they must have been close to his head. As Maher points out in his routine that idea that you are going to knowingly let someone do that from hundreds of metres away is ridiculous.

It's TDS over-taking logic.
Click to expand...
The F.B.I. agree.

www.nbcnews.com

FBI confirms that a bullet struck Trump's ear during assassination attempt

In congressional testimony this week, FBI Director Christopher Wray had said "there’s some question about whether or not it’s a bullet or shrapnel" that hit the former president.
www.nbcnews.com www.nbcnews.com
 
Wisbech Eagle said:
Why?

It could have either been an accident or acceptable collateral to provide authenticity!

Let me emphasise I don’t believe it was either but some do. When conspiracy theories are constructed they have to have plausibility, even if extremely unlikely, to survive.
Click to expand...
Classic Wisbechian obfuscation.
 
Stirlingsays said:
It's bonkers but he can't admit fault in supporting this nonsense at the time and if I remember correctly it's of note that he was the only person who supported the theory on here.

I don't criticise not taking what happened at face value, as I think that's always valid. Not that he appears to support people doing that for anything else apparently....covid I'm looking at you.

However, once you look into it.... nothing he supported makes much sense.....and that's worthy of criticism. He appears to have believed it because he preferred to.

What he suggests would have required the collusion of Trump's security team in letting him cut his own ear on the ground, that collusion would also have to include the sniper team in letting the event happen before ending it before another volley. Plus the collusion or required incompetence of the examining doctor.

Even more of a stretch is the reality of the people behind Trump who were shot with one dying. Not only does it prove that real bullets were fired but that they must have been close to his head. As Maher points out in his routine that idea that you are going to knowingly let someone do that from hundreds of metres away is ridiculous.

It's TDS over-taking logic.
Click to expand...
I don’t and didn’t “support the theory”.

It’s simply that when dealing with Trump nothing he says, does or is involved with, can ever be treated at face value. The immediate reaction for many, when he stood and raised his fist, was that he was faking it. There could be many ways to fake an event like that, with innocent bystanders being hurt as a consequence.

That doesn’t mean I think it’s true. Only that I can understand why people reacted that way. With Trump anything is possible. To describe that as TDS is to deny the obvious.

To compare not trusting Trump, which any sane person does, with not trusting the worldwide response to the pandemic, is beyond ridiculous. It’s truly insane.
 
Wisbech Eagle said:
I don’t and didn’t “support the theory”.
Click to expand...

You did support it, you were the one who brought the theory onto Hol and argued for it.

I remember arguing the fruitcake-ness of your introduced conspiracy theory on here. As usual you just ignored all the obvious problems with it. Seemingly it's only when the theory you pushed is ridiculed from the left itself that you deny your backing for it.

As for the covid response.... It's the totality of the whole situation, from the origin story, to the censorship, to the nudge units, to the restricted and protected scope of inquires, to the cost, to half truths presented as truths....So many factors.

But Covid is one example, what I'm referring to is a mindset that cares less for truth and more for personal biases. I don't fault not trusting an official explanation of events, however if someone is going to do that....what they present in its place needs to stand up to scrutiny itself.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Holmesdale Online Shop

Back
Top