I'm not gonna say that couldn't have happened, but doesn't it seem a little bit convenient that all of those figures were in the same place at the same time?
No, he is right to question it. If you do not question it, then you are simply going with your biases.
If its true, it will come out. Truth has to be tested by being questioned, pulled at, yanked at, and every weakness poked. Then, and only then, can the hammer of true justice fall.
If you are unwilling play devils advocate and question this, then this is just cheer leading, and not critical thinking.
note also that add_3 did not question "is this beyond reason?" "Is this impossible?". We know its possible, in a world full of private jets.
But you have to realize that normies and others will ask these sorts of questions. If the only retort you have is "C'mon man, try harder", will this convince them?
In any case, when you read the document, it is stated that the interviewee could not provide corroborating evidence.
was unable to provide any supporting or corroborating evidence or the identities of any witnesses to support his claim of victimization. did provide a handwritten list of his family and extended family members and it was not clear what investigative value, if any the list held. also stated that his great uncle, is in possession of video evidence of his crimes against a
Do not let bias could your ability to apply critical thinking. The entire premise of the justice system the Founders envisioned (based on common law), involves applying every scrutiny and questioning things until the truth becomes undeniable, not because of belief or bias, but because of fact coupled with reason.
Another thing to add was their initial conversation with the witness made them think there were signs of mental illness or emotional instability. I know that could be seen as a way to dismiss it easily, but it's possible that the dude legitimately was mentally ill and was going through psychosis. Also, that's a whole lot going on in one yacht. Think of the mess that would leave on a yacht. I just can't imagine. The logistics of it seem wild.
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA01246048.pdf
thanks freedompatriot
I'm not gonna say that couldn't have happened, but doesn't it seem a little bit convenient that all of those figures were in the same place at the same time?
Because we don't live in a world full of private jets and wealth beyond reason, for those "accused"? Try harder man.
No, he is right to question it. If you do not question it, then you are simply going with your biases.
If its true, it will come out. Truth has to be tested by being questioned, pulled at, yanked at, and every weakness poked. Then, and only then, can the hammer of true justice fall.
If you are unwilling play devils advocate and question this, then this is just cheer leading, and not critical thinking.
note also that add_3 did not question "is this beyond reason?" "Is this impossible?". We know its possible, in a world full of private jets.
But you have to realize that normies and others will ask these sorts of questions. If the only retort you have is "C'mon man, try harder", will this convince them?
In any case, when you read the document, it is stated that the interviewee could not provide corroborating evidence.
Do not let bias could your ability to apply critical thinking. The entire premise of the justice system the Founders envisioned (based on common law), involves applying every scrutiny and questioning things until the truth becomes undeniable, not because of belief or bias, but because of fact coupled with reason.
Another thing to add was their initial conversation with the witness made them think there were signs of mental illness or emotional instability. I know that could be seen as a way to dismiss it easily, but it's possible that the dude legitimately was mentally ill and was going through psychosis. Also, that's a whole lot going on in one yacht. Think of the mess that would leave on a yacht. I just can't imagine. The logistics of it seem wild.