I'm raising queries about one specific source you referenced. Or is the word of a government source the be treated as holy writ and beyond question?
Regards the result, well, I'll have to wait and see what the reasoning is. The entire trial is quite politicised and that reduces the chance of a well-reasoned verdict, whichever party that verdict favours.
I see you’re already setting the table with excuses. Not very confident, are you. You shouldn’t be. To your credit, that at least shows some level of intelligence.
Oh, no, a considered response instead of spinal-reflex posturing!
I find it ironic that after chiding me for "discrediting sources" you've yet to provide, you're in the next breath chiding me for not unconditionally signing onto a verdict that's not even produced yet.
Still, such is the life of a hypocrite, I suppose.
I'm raising queries about one specific source you referenced. Or is the word of a government source the be treated as holy writ and beyond question?
Regards the result, well, I'll have to wait and see what the reasoning is. The entire trial is quite politicised and that reduces the chance of a well-reasoned verdict, whichever party that verdict favours.
I see you’re already setting the table with excuses. Not very confident, are you. You shouldn’t be. To your credit, that at least shows some level of intelligence.
Oh, no, a considered response instead of spinal-reflex posturing!
I find it ironic that after chiding me for "discrediting sources" you've yet to provide, you're in the next breath chiding me for not unconditionally signing onto a verdict that's not even produced yet.
Still, such is the life of a hypocrite, I suppose.