Quote:
Originally Posted by PaperBagger'14
Suggesting the possibility of a cover up, especially anonymously on the internet, does not mean anyone has to name who when or what was covered up. It is speculation that has little value one way or another, but we are allowed to speculate. If you have any information to provide I'd love to read it.
|
I suppose you're right in the sense that things said on the internet, especially in this context, hold little value in the grand scheme of things. It's not like it is going to affect the outcome of this Chu disaster.
But, if we have learned anything over the past few years, it's that wild speculation and misinformation doesn't promote a healthy dialogue and can in fact, have serious consequences. So my point was that if you want to speculate and or allege some sort of cover up or conspiracy at least have the sense to post relevant information as to why you feel that way. Again, I don't think that's too much to ask. It is a forum for discussion afterall.
Locke (and others) has a history of anti-police sentiment and of post fly-bys that add little to the conversation. If he wants to paint all police issues with one brush, that's his prerogative. But he should also be called out on it.
Sent from my HD1905 using Tapatalk