Fake marriage scheme busted

Sep 2017
2,391
1,191
Hell
#21
It's standard forum protocol for the one making claims to justify the claims.
That is nonsense in defense of someone too lazy to follow his own critique regarding OP. The OP gave a link he did not like and he attacked the source instead of trying to find if there were others that reported this operation. I googled "fake marriage scam" and there were dozens of articles including one from ABC which I kindly informed him that it was also reported by ABC which quoted the agent in charge which I verified by posting his facebook photo. In less than the time he took to type his stupid reply, he could have found the ABC article. In two tries he did nothing to fact check, so much for his following his own advice. If I had said (any left wing site) reported it, he wouldn't have asked for a link, and you wouldn't have said one word about protocol.

I don't even understand why some people got to have a tribe mentality and have to take partisan stances even when something really has nothing to do with politics.
 
Apr 2013
38,084
26,093
La La Land North
#23
That is nonsense in defense of someone too lazy to follow his own critique regarding OP. The OP gave a link he did not like and he attacked the source instead of trying to find if there were others that reported this operation. I googled "fake marriage scam" and there were dozens of articles including one from ABC which I kindly informed him that it was also reported by ABC which quoted the agent in charge which I verified by posting his facebook photo. In less than the time he took to type his stupid reply, he could have found the ABC article. In two tries he did nothing to fact check, so much for his following his own advice. If I had said (any left wing site) reported it, he wouldn't have asked for a link, and you wouldn't have said one word about protocol.

I don't even understand why some people got to have a tribe mentality and have to take partisan stances even when something really has nothing to do with politics.
But it is still standard forum protocol.
 
Likes: noonereal
Sep 2017
2,391
1,191
Hell
#24
But it is still standard forum protocol.
I understand your point. so please give mine some consideration:

I had no vested interest in the conversation other than my first post, in reply to Bubba declaring that war brides and mail order brides are indeed genuine.
47 attacked the OP source and suggested fact check, which I then tried to do and in mere seconds I found dozens of articles.
ABC being the biggest name on the first page other then FOX, so knowing that some here would automatically attack FOX, I chose ABC - which I did read.
ABC had more details, breaking down the number and type of charges as told by Agent in Charge.
I googled the name and indeed he was a very high ranking official, and I found his facebook picture that correlated with what does look like him in a news conference among the dozens of articles that I perused through.
I gave 47 the heads up that it is not fake news and that real agent is quoted on camera. Not to argue, just a heads up and lefted it at that.
47 then had a smart ass remark as a reply. If he had done fact checking as he so critique the OP about, he would have immediately went to ABC, read article and know that the claimant is a real person, and not some "unnamed source" or "an official that declined to be named".
For someone that complained about fact checking, he was too lazy twice to actually do what he himself demanded.
Clearly I had no argument other than to point out it was also reported by ABC, and not just some obscure blog as laid out by 47
There is no rule here that requires a link just to make a comment. Any "protocol" is you weak attempt to side up with 47.
If you want to draw a line in the sand about this mythical "protocol" of yours, please remember that you would have been guilty of breaking your own protocol countless times when you've made a comment without a link.
 
Feb 2019
1,178
493
nunya
#25
Right, he should only read news sources like the Huffington Post that tells us how bad Orange man is.

And yes, it may seem odd that the democrat party is angelic and the GOP demonic, but at least it's not fake news like Fox news!
Ah yes, how bad Trump is. So a news outlet reporting the faults of a president which has by far the most faults of every other president in history makes them fake news? If what they are saying is supported by facts then its not fake news.

Breitbart has a record of falsities and stupidity. Huffington post and more mainstream news sites do not. Though left bias may be present. At least utter falsities aren't.