XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, can.politics, alt.politics.liberalism
XPost: alt.politics.democrats, alt.politics.usa.republican
On 2024-03-17 23:26, AlleyCat wrote:
On Sun, 17 Mar 2024 22:18:59 -0700, Alan says...
On 2024-03-17 21:37, AlleyCat wrote:
On Sun, 17 Mar 2024 19:36:40 -0700, Alan says...
And you trust anonymous Twitter sources, loser?
LOL... ski bunny looked into it and found it to be true, then came back and >>> pretended he didn't, and reductio ad absur-dumbed his way into another lie. >>
I think the Fox News part of your taken-from-Twitter collage of video
clips talked about maybe "dozens"...
I never said that the Fox News video was THE source of the 5,000 number... did
I?
And yet it is who you brought up when I mentioned the anonymity of your
video collage.
So your one non-anonymous doesn't support your number.
...not "over 5,000"...
Didn't look at all the cites, did you? That's because you're a faggot, who buries his head in his partners ass, any time he doesn't wanna see the truth.
https://i.imgur.com/csvCHiE.png
"Some of the cases came to light as a result of an investigation by the immigration and customs agency, whose Operation Flicker in 2006 identified 5,000 people who had paid for access to overseas pornography websites. Among the 5,000 were a contractor at a weapons-testing base in California and another
at a naval air warfare centre in the same state." - https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/jul/24/pentagon-us-staff-downloaded- child-pornography
"Among the 5,000" isn't the same as "Over 5,000 Pentagon Department of
Defense, U.S. Military, DARPA, NSA and NASA employees"
You're one lazy stupid fuck.
Just because someone on Twitter reposts news articles or videos, doesn't make the story any less true, ESPECIALLY if those stories, articles and videos came
from the mainstream media.
Boy, you are fucked in the head, if you think simply being contrary refutes a fucking thing.
How about CNN? You believe THEIR anonymous asses?
https://i.imgur.com/zfaLAlM.mp4
Have you got dates for these?
I wouldn't care if the story was a 100 years old. I used it as ONE reason and to illustrate why we shouldn't trust the government, because they tried to cover this story up.
YOU going on a minutiae rant, means nothing.
This story happened and the government tried to cover it up. End of story.
If you wanna verify that... look it up your damn self. I'm actually kinda tired
of making you look stupid. It's not hard, though it is time-consuming.
Sometimes, it's worth it, but not now.
https://video.twimg.com/amplify_video/1762631096028516352/vid/avc1/1280x720/csu
zt4GTxrw-_HRw.mp4?tag=14
So easy:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/jul/24/pentagon-us-staff-downloaded- >>> child-pornography
So more than 13 YEARS ago.
Non sequitur.
It very much does follow.
https://youtu.be/XJyTaHiS3OQ
https://news.yahoo.com/blogs/upshot/pentagon-declined-investigate-hundreds- >>> purchases-child-pornography.html
There... I did your bidding.
And demonstrated that they're all talking about one incident in 2010
No. The story goes much deeper than I've shown, because I used it as a vehicle
to show why we shouldn't trust the government. I can show 10,000 more reasons,
but it was a one off just to tell you liberals who tell us to trust the government, ONLY because there's a Democrat in the White House, to fuck off.
So you don't show it...
...but we're just supposed to take YOUR word for it, loser?
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
