I have integrity and truth on my side and the courage to state it in the face of 'mobbing' and nothing can cloak that fact. No amount of obsfuscation or sophistry can change that absolute fact.
By the way, Vixen, I'd like to repeat a sentiment which is along the lines of something else I wrote in this thread yesterday. And what I'm saying here is sincere, genuine and heartfelt, I promise:
It's truly not a matter of "piling on" someone for sport, or because of any preconceptions about that person*. Instead, it's chiefly on account of three things:
1) Your overarching claim is wrong. And it's demonstrably wrong. And the evidence to that effect has been provided in some volume within this thread. But this, by itself, is not the driving factor behind the sentiments of responses to your posts. It's because (1) here is in conjunction with (2) and (3) below.
2) You've repeatedly been doubling down, every time that evidence running contrary to your claims is provided. And in addition to that, your responses have become aggressively defensive.
3) Your umbrella claim (which is, in essence, that the authorities and the mainstream media operators - and probably also the main social media operators - had conspired together to impose a news blackout in this case) was, and remains, an extraordinary claim. And, as the saying goes, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. No such (reliable) evidence has ever been forthcoming.
In terms of the mechanisms and sentiments, it's not at all dissimilar to the 9/11 so-called "Truthers". Why do you think this group of people are ridiculed and mocked by almost every mainstream commentators (as well as posters within the relevant threads on this forum, of course)? It's precisely because this group has consistently been provided with conclusive evidence that their claims are wrong, yet they've reacted by repeating their claims with indignation, and claiming that the attacks on their claims somehow lend credence to the notion that their claims are correct. And because their claims are in any case so extraordinary - in this case, that the 9/11 attacks were not purely carried out by 19 men under the control of (and financed by) a small (but wealthy) extremist terrorist group, but rather that they were carried out with the collusion (and possible/probable involvement) of the US Government - but they never provided a single piece of credible, reliable evidence to support their claim.
* I know for sure that this is true of me personally, and I honestly can't see anything which makes me think it's not also true of others within this thread.
