Prove it. Seriously, I agree with you, but can you back up your statement?
The person saying it's real, is the person who needs to prove it's real.
Bullshit. Everyone should be able to back their statements up. Like, if you present a theory you should have reasons for it. If you reject it, you should be able to present reasons why.
Arguing about who has to present evidence is such a fucking kike tactic.
The sad fact is that without doing some research it is actuallh very difficult to refute the article. Technology has advanced to the point that even a person standing in front of you could be a robot or a hologram. Bill Gates COULD be in prison. YOU would NOT know. Mainstream media would not cover it unless it advanced their agenda, and fringe sites would have crazy sounding articles about it to discredit any bits of truth that may leak.
No...this is simple logic, jackass. I wouldn't need to explain my dissent, if the person making the claim either: A.Never made the claim, or B.Backed their claim with evidence.
If someone DID back their claim with evidence, I'd need to refute that evidence in my dissent. I don't feel the need to refute a link to a website that has a known horrible track record of simply MAKING SHIT UP.
All that said, it's clearly bullshit that the US Military would arrest Bill Gates, for Child Trafficking. The US Military does not arrest people for Child Trafficking, unless it involves military personnel, or occurs on military property. Local police, state police, US Marshals, FBI, probably a dozen other agencies could get in on that action. The US military never would.
And no, technology is not at the point where a person standing in front of me could be a robot or hologram. We aren't there yet.
True enough, he could be in prison. And no doubt, our government is shady as fuck and is doing all kinds of who knows what.
But the burden of evidence is on the claimant. It's not a "kike" tactic, it's fucking logic. The person making the initial claim bears the burden of proof. Why? So that the poor schmucks who have to listen to their bullshit don't end up wasting their time refuting stupid fucking claims like this. Like me, right now, wasting my time.
Arguing about who has to present evidence is such a fucking kike tactic.
dude, there is literally no associated evidence. this is as real as some erotic fanfic
why me? whenever anyone else calls something 'fake news' they never have to prove its fake.
You don't have to. You're good fren. Just trying to have a discussion.
The burden of proof is on the accuser.
Yeah...an accusation was made that the OP shared fake news.
The article itself provides no evidence. As much as I'd love for it to be true, I see nothing supporting the claim. That is the epitome of fake news.
(post is archived)