Simon Belmont wrote:Doctor Scratch wrote:Presumably it was DCP himself who told you this. And yet, oddly, the fact that he has to do this behind the scenes and in secret only serves to reinforce the validity of my informant's "intel."
Still waiting for you to post either your personal, or your employer's financial records, since you think it would be "so easy" for Dr. Peterson to do so.
I never said that it would be "so easy" for Doctor Peterson to post the MI's budget. I said that I considered my informant's allegations to be reliable because they were the sort of allegations that could be easily invalidated via real, hard, concrete evidence--evidence which the apologists never, ever produce.
And your insistence here doesn't make a lick of sense, Simon. For one thing, you are assuming that I have access to my employer's budget, even though I might not. (DCP openly stated that he'd been in a budget meeting right around the time that I was passed that particular piece of intel.) For another thing, I've never asked for DCP's "personal financial records."
I imagine you will do no such thing, since your raison d'être is to apply highly unfair double standards to people you imagine to be your enemies. By doing this, you can seem to win every argument.
I don't see how there is anything "unfair" about relaying information I was given. It seems to me that you're over-reacting. I am actually doing the apologists a favor by pointing out how easy it would be to falsify the allegations. That the apologists refuse to falsify the claims in any kind of meaningful way is not my problem.