The Sound of Freedom

[Arthur Brain]

You're on record calling the film's exposure of child trafficking, "garbage". That's you showing your support for child trafficking by showing that you'd prefer the film's exposure of child trafficking to be suppressed.

Of course it isn't, to anyone sensible and logical at any rate.

 

[Arthur Brain]

My favorite criticism of the film was by Shoe0nHead:

Yeah, was hardly an astute criticism and just a YT account as I recall. Not real interested in any from left or right in the main. Plenty more grounded criticism as supplied already. Btw, why has Ballard cut ties with OUR?

 

[7djengo7]

Btw, why has Ballard cut ties with OUR?

If he did, it's probably because of your in-depth argyewmintashun.

 

[Jefferson]

Yeah, was hardly an astute criticism and just a YT account as I recall.

God forbid anyone listen to any viewpoint that is not first sanctioned by the mainstream media. Perish the thought.

 

[Arthur Brain]

If he did, it's probably because of your in-depth argyewmintashun.

One of your more coherent posts of late, well done!

 

[Arthur Brain]

God forbid anyone listen to any viewpoint that is not first sanctioned by the mainstream media. Perish the thought.

Oh, there's plenty of stuff on any given outlet that isn't sanctioned by 'mainstream media' Jefferson. Doesn't mean it's worth anything though...

 

[Jefferson]

Oh, there's plenty of stuff on any given outlet that isn't sanctioned by 'mainstream media' Jefferson. Doesn't mean it's worth anything though.

If something is not sanctioned by the mainstream media, do you automatically assume it's not worth anything?

 

[7djengo7]

One of your more coherent posts of late, well done!

When you sound it out, it sounds like the word "argumentation". But I didn't say "argumentation" because, as you well know, you have offered no argumentation.

 

[Arthur Brain]

If something is not sanctioned by the mainstream media, do you automatically assume it's not worth anything?

I'm kinda discerning where I get my news from and I like to have it corroborated from other, verifiable sources that also have credibility. Far right outlets don't apply...

 

[7djengo7]

Oh, there's plenty of stuff on any given outlet that isn't sanctioned by 'mainstream media' Jefferson. Doesn't mean it's worth anything though...

IOW, unless it's in agreement with the MSM, @Arthur Brain mindlessly rejects it.

 

[Arthur Brain]

When you sound it out, it sounds like the word "argumentation". But I didn't say "argumentation" because, as you well know, you have offered no argumentation.

Oh, I know that's what you were shooting for but not very well done really to be honest. I'm offering reason, up to you if you're up to the task.

 

[Arthur Brain]

IOW, unless it's in agreement with the MSM, @Arthur Brain mindlessly rejects it.

Um, no, it has to be credible, verifiable and not bat crazy is all...

 

[Jefferson]

I'm kinda discerning where I get my news from and I like to have it corroborated from other, verifiable sources that also have credibility. Far right outlets don't apply...

Was that a yes or a no?

 

[Arthur Brain]

Was that a yes or a no?

What's tripping you up?

 

[7djengo7]

I'm kinda discerning where I get my news from and I like to have it corroborated from other, verifiable sources that also have credibility.

What vaccuous blabber!

What if something is verifiable but not credible?

What if something is credible but not verfiable?

If verifiability is credibility/credibility is verifiability, why add "also credibility" when you've already said "verifiable"?

You're not even saying anything; you're merely stringing cheap words together meaninglessly, poser.

 

[7djengo7]

What's tripping you up?

Why can't you answer @Jefferson's question?

If something is not sanctioned by the mainstream media, do you automatically assume it's not worth anything?

Yes or No?

@Arthur Brain: <NO ANSWER>
@Arthur Brain: <LIES ABOUT HIS FAILURE TO ANSWER>

 

[Arthur Brain]

What vaccuous blabber!

What if something is verifiable but not credible?

What if something is credible but not verfiable?

If verifiability is credibility/credibility is verifiability, why add "also credibility" when you've already said "verifiable"?

You're not even saying anything; you're merely stringing cheap words together meaninglessly, poser.

If something's credible then it's verifiable.

Think these things through a bit more.

 

[Arthur Brain]

Why can't you answer @Jefferson's question?

Yes or No?

@Arthur Brain: <NO ANSWER>
@Arthur Brain: <LIES ABOUT HIS FAILURE TO ANSWER>

Oh dear, are you back to your "no answer" bores again?

He was answered.

 

[7djengo7]

Um, no, it has to be credible, verifiable and not bat crazy is all...

Since so much is false that you let on like you believe, apparently by "credible", "verifiable", and "not bat crazy", you mean false.

 

[Arthur Brain]

Since so much is false that you let on like you believe, apparently by "credible", "verifiable", and "not bat crazy", you mean false.

Yeah, try typing something that actually makes sense there dude...