4 ms·
Yes, interesting how the facts don't change. If you'd like to challenge the facts, do so. Pointing out that facts have been posted before in response to the sa
by yucky 5y ago
Yes, interesting how the facts don't change.
If you'd like to challenge the facts, do so. Pointing out that facts have been posted before in response to the same questions, doesn't change the facts.
Unless you think we can't trust BBC and Reuters...?
- SideburnsOfDoom 5y agoAnd neither do the talking points change. Replying in good faith is pointless, they can and have been debunked multiple times already, it makes no odds to the effort to push this. As I said: > this kind of disinformation does not need to even be self-consistent or even that believable. But it does need to be relentlessly sent out.
- yucky 5y agoWe both know why you can't back up your claims with sources, and I can. And so does everybody reading this.
- SideburnsOfDoom 5y agosources been provided to you before. It didn't change your talking point then, so it's a waste of time now.