there is no evidence it is real, either. i could write another paper and submit that to Crowder, or Tucker Carlson. in fact i dont think shooters are required to have manifestos at all. you could become violent and not leave a confession behind, honestly. i think the entire concept of having the reason explained to us on paper is a CIA psyop so they can make sure the focus is on whatever they want it to be after a shooting
So, the physical paper with the writing in ink isn't "evidence"? Isn't "real"? Does this mean that the truth value of anything is evidence-free? And we can claim that proffered evidence is simply not "real" if we don't want to think so? This is interesting...from a group psychology standpoint.
literally anybody can write down whatever they want and take a picture of it and send it to Crowder. the police probably know if there was a manifesto it would say "im a tranny sicko shooting christians for not letting me be as big a faggot as i want". so instead they wrote up a fake manifesto and leaked it, to make sure it focuses on what they want-- whitey is bad. i seriously doubt that is real
Hmmm... The CIA finally found a good writer to create the document.
Perhaps, but that doesn't matter. This is the narrative now.
Yes, the 48 hour rule could apply, but I would be surprised to see this one change.
*The CIA finally found a writer to create the document
Edit: Maybe - monitoring.
C'mon man...there was a writers strike
No evidence that the document is anything but real. Don't go making up a myth.
I mean, everything is fake and gay these days.
there is no evidence it is real, either. i could write another paper and submit that to Crowder, or Tucker Carlson. in fact i dont think shooters are required to have manifestos at all. you could become violent and not leave a confession behind, honestly. i think the entire concept of having the reason explained to us on paper is a CIA psyop so they can make sure the focus is on whatever they want it to be after a shooting
So, the physical paper with the writing in ink isn't "evidence"? Isn't "real"? Does this mean that the truth value of anything is evidence-free? And we can claim that proffered evidence is simply not "real" if we don't want to think so? This is interesting...from a group psychology standpoint.
literally anybody can write down whatever they want and take a picture of it and send it to Crowder. the police probably know if there was a manifesto it would say "im a tranny sicko shooting christians for not letting me be as big a faggot as i want". so instead they wrote up a fake manifesto and leaked it, to make sure it focuses on what they want-- whitey is bad. i seriously doubt that is real
No evidence that you have a brain, either.
It's a shill. Surprised the mods keep this one around, maybe he does less harm that way instead of creating new accounts.
Not a shill. Just someone who questions the unquestionable.
The more I see from DRD the more I'm of this view, I have to admit. Too many stances like this one, seems more PDW than agile thinking anon IMO.
In this case what evidence is there the "document" is anything, period??!! So certainly, asserting "anything but real" - just wow.
Ha, ha. You are the one reduced to making insults. That's all the insight you have? Insults?
Thats not an insult
Thats an observation