I have a high degree of confidence in what I write. There's opinions, which are just that, opinions, and they are based on other knowledgeable stuff. Then there are ops that one can document where they got the information from. In the op you are talking about, it'd take me a couple hours to detail why I came to the conclusion of pointing out what he said and my assessed opinion, combined with and documented from his spoken words or those closely aligned with him. What I used though, in the post, was toward the empathy others had, questions others had, aligned along with expressions others have spoken out on the blogs, to write that post. If I had aligned it with the spoken written truths and evidence that the overall objective goal behind these types of event (kirk event), is to move beyond religion, to actively engage kids to be influenced by influencers, which I most definitely can prove, it would have taken the emphasis off the right of people to question without fear what was taking place. If I had set it into motion that Kirk was killed because they were not going to let him increase his influence over the younger generation religiously, that's a whole different topic, and involves a lot more detail. You know, I might have been a whole lot closer to being spot on about that because his wife, a couple weeks ago, came out and said he was going to run for president, that's not the direction they are going with this, the direction is to move away from religion. The reason why is because religion doesn't work, it causes to much strife. I firmly believe, that one day, people who are religious will be allowed to keep their faith but have to watch what they say.
In a way, they use religion to control people, in the end, they won't need that anymore, they'll control people through the use of digitalization much like China does.
I never said you don't follow stuff as much as I do, I said maybe you don't. Maybe is the right word, I have no idea what you do with your time.