I can't tell if you're arguing against me, or the UK government - you know, the ones who detained the partner of a journalist using anti-terrorism law. That is where this connection was made.
Of course I think their actions are outrageous and unreasonable. In the light of them, however, hypothesising that supporting The Guardian financially may be construed by those in power as financing terrorism is mere extrapolation.
> In the light of them, however, hypothesising that supporting The Guardian financially may be construed by those in power as financing terrorism is mere extrapolation.
Do you think repeating yourself makes you right? It does not. You've not earned any kind of right to dismiss the matter with statements like that.
I actually looked at the age of your account before replying because I thought you were a troll. Unfortunately it looks like those suspicions were well-founded. 822 days - wow, you bided your time.
> Do you think repeating yourself makes you right? It does not. You've not earned any kind of right to dismiss the matter with that kind of language.
You are not the arbiter of discussion.
> I actually looked at the age of your account before replying because I suspected you to be a troll. Unfortunately it looks like those suspicious were well-founded. 822 days old - wow, you bided your time.
Ironically I was just discussing how irrational conspiracy theorists use contradictory information to confirm their existing beliefs. Thank you for providing me with a perfect example.
I honestly have no idea what you are talking about. What conspiracy theories? We are talking about the frigging news.
Do you know what a troll is? It's someone who asserts deliberately stupid/annoying arguments to get a rise out of everyone else, who are trying to have a sincere discussion.
In other words, someone who sounds exactly like you. I won't be wasting any more time here.
> Do you know what a troll is? It's someone who asserts deliberately stupid/annoying arguments to get a rise out of everyone else, who are trying to have a sincere discussion.
> In other words, someone who sounds exactly like you
I am calling for rational discussion and no hyperbole. You must be practically incapable of reading to confuse yourself in such a manner.
Of course I think their actions are outrageous and unreasonable. In the light of them, however, hypothesising that supporting The Guardian financially may be construed by those in power as financing terrorism is mere extrapolation.