Seems a while ago I read a post by member Shodan regarding this exact topic- when he or she broached the topic, the mob/herd mentality response was swift and immediate- this member is hateful, evil and trolling, cannot possibly be true, and the thread was closed due to being inflammatory trolling?
But now a major liberal newspaper feels it has enough evidence to question it as well- not the National Enquirer, but the Minnesota Star Tribune! A respected paper for over 150 years!
I personally don’t know or care, but have issue with pile-ons and people who know zero on a topic insisting they know things they don’t about people they don’t know.
I started this to see if people will as quickly and vehemently admit they may have been wrong.
To the board, if it is out of order to restart a thread on this topic, even in light of new evidence, no offense intended, please close if needed. Otherwise, let the apologies begin!
So we have confirmation of the fact that everyone already knew that there were some paperwork problems with her marriage, and we have a repetition of the rumor that she was married to her brother, with the same complete and utter lack of any evidence whatsoever that we had when the rumor first surfaced.
How the heck does somebody “vehemently admit” that they “may” have been wrong? Seize them by the lapels, thrust your face into theirs, and scream “Not really that sure about this, but…”?
“I said someone was a horrible person for saying X, it turns out in light of new evidence they may be correct or were correct, therefore I apologize with the same vigor as my initial insult.”
In society people are quick to pounce strongly on someone who they think was out of order, but often when it turns out they were or may have been correct all along, the apologies, if they ever come, are never as strong or vehement as the accusations.
Richard Jewell, slammed and vilified by every paper and TV personality in the country, I don’t recall the apologies, if any, of similar voice.
Ditto Gary Condit and myriad others.
Maybe a time for some self reflection for all to not rail against something if you don’t have personal insight into the subject. Like the "Michael Jackson makes great music that I love, therefore he couldn’t have done X, that mindset.
I’ll vehemently admit that the OP reads like it was written by a drunk baboon. Proofread your shit homeboy. Is the gist that world owes Shodan an apology because he might have been tenuously right about something? How about fuck him sideways and the weenie OP too.
I found nothing in the Star Tribune article that showed Shodan to be correct in his trolling. I require a vehement apology from the OP for wasting my time.
And Shodan is still a cowardly pustule who prefers to run and hide when proven wrong, so it’s no surprise he wimps out again.
Actually the OP is perfectly readable but I understand insults are de riguer here, and are usually the last refuge of someone with nothing germane to add.
The gist is- don’t take a position either way, on any topic where you don’t know the facts. Wack shit like that makes you look dumb, homeboy.
I started reading the article, and frankly I got bored so I didn’t get the finish. It read like high school students talking about what a bitch Stacey is for that text sent to Tyler but then Tyler talked to Myler about Macy and then Macy’s mom didn’t even let her go to the mall when she knew that Tyler, Stacey, and Miles (not Myler) were going and it was SO UNFAIR!
I read that article as reporting on the controversy and not directly asserting that she married her brother. I’m hard-pressed to decide if that is something that reputable journalists should do. Take the Obama birth certificate thing: should that have been in the news at all (before he released his birth certificate to disprove the conspiracy theory), on the basis that some people are talking about something without evidence?
As far as I can tell, the linked article in the OP does not provide even a shred of evidence for any claim/implication that Omar married her brother, so I’m not sure how this excuses what Shodan implied about her marriage.
Shodan tried to imply a baseless and slanderous conspiracy theory about Omar might be true, and then he was warned for it. As far as I can tell, the article linked in the OP provides no evidence at all, and this remains a baseless and slanderous conspiracy theory about Omar. So I’m not sure why Shodan would deserve an apology.
You are saying a major liberal US newspaper just up and decided to publish slanderous baseless conspiracy theories against one of its own? It does not occur to you that it is possible they have more insight into this than you?
Huh? Can you provide a quote of what you’re talking about? The article you linked to didn’t make any allegations at all that Omar married her brother, much less provide any evidence. Unless I missed it. They may have referred to the (baseless) conspiracy theory floating around on extremist websites, but I didn’t see any allegations “against one of its own”.