Natalee Holloway wasn't sex trafficked. She was killed by serial killer Joran Van Der Sloot. He only said she was trafficked as one of many false stories he gave to try to cover his @$$.
Do you not understand why it's good to use up-to-date sources that are accurate? You're making researching anons look bad.
Update December 2008:
Joran van der Sloot changes his story again. This time he claims what I suggested in my audio file; namely, that she was sold as a sex slave.
Also the website does not say she WAS sex trafficked. It IMPLIES that she was. Don't be daft on purpose. You're using liberal lawyer tricks to try to talk about what the meaning of "was" was.
Baby, that's why we don't use old, old sources. It's embarrassing when you make big statements without all the data.
For instance, the data that I have that YOU have never heard of is video footage of Joran Van Der Sloot going in and out of his hotel room as he is murdering a woman in a hotel in South America.
When you look at his history of murdering women, it becomes clear what happened to Natalee Holloway. If you have a better explanation then YOU prove it. But you can't prove it if you're using old "evidence" that ignores all the things we have learned.
The bible is good, but it doesn't prove that, just because it stays good, everything else is eternally true, as well. I mean, we used to wonder who killed the Lindbergh baby, now we have enough proof to know. You gotta stay informed on things that are in the present and not argue when other anons try to correct you, dear.
Uhhh...the article you posted has things in it that are totally wrong. This guy is right. You need to keep up to date on your sources, ma'am.
Like?
Dang it, woman. Aren't you literate?
Natalee Holloway wasn't sex trafficked. She was killed by serial killer Joran Van Der Sloot. He only said she was trafficked as one of many false stories he gave to try to cover his @$$.
Do you not understand why it's good to use up-to-date sources that are accurate? You're making researching anons look bad.
The website doesn't say she WAS sex trafficked.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disappearance_of_Natalee_Holloway
Prove it.
Also the website does not say she WAS sex trafficked. It IMPLIES that she was. Don't be daft on purpose. You're using liberal lawyer tricks to try to talk about what the meaning of "was" was.
Baby, that's why we don't use old, old sources. It's embarrassing when you make big statements without all the data.
For instance, the data that I have that YOU have never heard of is video footage of Joran Van Der Sloot going in and out of his hotel room as he is murdering a woman in a hotel in South America.
When you look at his history of murdering women, it becomes clear what happened to Natalee Holloway. If you have a better explanation then YOU prove it. But you can't prove it if you're using old "evidence" that ignores all the things we have learned.
The bible is good, but it doesn't prove that, just because it stays good, everything else is eternally true, as well. I mean, we used to wonder who killed the Lindbergh baby, now we have enough proof to know. You gotta stay informed on things that are in the present and not argue when other anons try to correct you, dear.
That guy responding to you is trying to help you out and you are arguing with him.
LIIIIIKE?