George Floyd Good Read

[the other bob wilson]

Your attention to detail is shocking.

Care to tell us why?

[Wales-Bales]

Care to tell us why?

Failure to read simple sentences 3 times in 2 days.

[the other bob wilson]

Failure to read simple sentences 3 times in 2 days.

Please elaborate.

[Wales-Bales]

Please elaborate.

Don't want to derail proceedings, but there is one example in this thread.

[Feedback]

Don't want to derail proceedings, but there is one example in this thread.

so no examples then. fine.

[the other bob wilson]

Don't want to derail proceedings, but there is one example in this thread.

So what your'e saying is that you want it both ways then - you're happy to make an irrelevant point which suits your agenda, but not to go into details about it. I think I'll leave things there because there are no end of threads already on here that have gone the way this one, almost certainly, will.

[Loramski]

So what your'e saying is that you want it both ways then - you're happy to make an irrelevant point which suits your agenda, but not to go into details about it. I think I'll leave things there because there are no end of threads already on here that have gone the way this one, almost certainly, will.

It's an interesting article to be fair, well balanced with some interesting points to make.

Very long though, maybe the reason Wales-Bales is a bit vague about it is that he only gave himself three minutes to read the whole thing (the attachment on Chauvin is equally as long as the main article) before replying. Life on Mars must've been tired because he didn't reply to Wales-Bales (it was quarter to one in the morning to be fair. Come to think about it, it was an amazing coincidence that both of them were on here at that time) and now seems to have forgotten he even started the thread because he hasn't come back to pass comment on it. Maybe he's got to the end of the article now and doesn't think it was such a good read after all.

[Wales-Bales]

It's an interesting article to be fair, well balanced with some interesting points to make.

Very long though, maybe the reason Wales-Bales is a bit vague about it is that he only gave himself three minutes to read the whole thing (the attachment on Chauvin is equally as long as the main article) before replying. Life on Mars must've been tired because he didn't reply to Wales-Bales (it was quarter to one in the morning to be fair. Come to think about it, it was an amazing coincidence that both of them were on here at that time) and now seems to have forgotten he even started the thread because he hasn't come back to pass comment on it. Maybe he's got to the end of the article now and doesn't think it was such a good read after all.

What are you rambling on about? My comment about Floyd had nothing to do with the article. I actually did read it this morning, and I've already done a deep dive on Floyd & Chauvin a few weeks ago that goes way beyond what the Snopes perception influencers want you to know.