Bill Cosby: ‘Mainstream Media Are the Insurrectionists Who Stormed the Capitol,’ ‘Trying To Demolish the Constitution’

submitted by hennaojichan from winterwatch.net

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]ActuallyNot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

These sixty complaints are well cited. If there's one that you think is incorrectly reported in wiki, let me know, and let's look at it.

We can get the wiki page corrected.

[–]JasonCarswellPlatinum Foil Fedora 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (7 children)

Citing corrupt corporate media is hardly well-cited. That's what they want you to think.

Wikipedia is not worth the effort. It's an endless timesuck if you let it be. I was banned for 1 year in 2016-2017 for being "another polite truther". The place is rigged and compromised with armies of CIA/Mossad/shill teams, despite it being clearly against the rules that Wikipedians wield around in shorthand legalese of acronyms to alienate actual contributors.

[–]ActuallyNot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Citing corrupt corporate media is hardly well-cited. That's what they want you to think.

Which of those women do you think don't exist, or didn't make the complaint?

I was banned for 1 year in 2016-2017 for being "another polite truther".

Which article were you trying to inject your unique brand of batshit crazy into?

The place is rigged and compromised with armies of CIA/Mossad/shill teams

Yeah. Being paranoid delusional doesn't imply that you'd be making well referenced, neutral point-of-view edits.

[–]JasonCarswellPlatinum Foil Fedora 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

Which of those women do you think don't exist, or didn't make the complaint?

Wrong arguments.

How many of those women are liars for fame, fortune, or other reasons - and how many coordinated their smear campaign?

[–]ActuallyNot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

You're changing your position. Before the problem was with Wikipedia as a source of the 60 accusations. Now it is that Cosby has 60 accusers that are merely after fame, fortune and "other things".

Is that right?

You now accept that those women exist and have made their complaints, as per the Wikipedia article?

[–]JasonCarswellPlatinum Foil Fedora 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

You're changing your position.

False.

I'm saying we must be skeptical about the accusations against Cosby AND the accusers' motives AND the veracity of Wikipedia. And of course, we should also remain skeptical of Cosby.

That has and will remain my position.

[–]ActuallyNot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Okay. Regarding the veracity of Wikipedia: Which of those women do you think don't exist, or didn't make the complaint?

[–]JasonCarswellPlatinum Foil Fedora 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

If I don't trust Wikipedia, the "official" narrative, those women, or even Cosby - what makes you think I want to debate the minutia and play your game?

The is no shortage of corporate media reports and even Wikipedia admits they have credibility issues and are compromised. Dive into that, yourself.

[–]ActuallyNot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

So, as far as you know, they all exist, and have made the accusations listed on the wiki page.

And you don't care to enter any discussion further than that.

So we agree about that.

Moving on then.