As far as I know we just have some guy and girl's word on it.
And everyone is pushing the story that some woman is who reported it. Where's the evidence on that?
I'm highly skeptical because these types of blowout stories without any evidence have a tendency to come back and make people look pretty stupid.
You are viewing a single comment's thread. View all
2
ScipioAfricanus1911 on scored.co
1 year ago2 points(+0/-0/+2Score on mirror)
I can appreciate the skepticism, and in this fucking goofy upside down world anything is possible. But with most things, I look at the two sides of the coin in the context of: Who benefits from this/Who is most harmed by this
Since all of the senior positions of the New York "Department of Environmental Conservation" (as usual an inversion of what they actually do) are kikes, and thus far the only one's I've seen vehemently defending the killings are kikes and faggots on reddit (mostly kikes anyway, and the one's that genetically aren't...are spiritually and thus deserve to share their fate), I'd say they are the most harmed by this.
Who benefits? Well if it's some kind of scam, I suppose the man & woman who had the squirrel & racoon. They seem to have a legitimate rescue organization, but then plenty of those have turned out to be anything but legitimate. Time will tell if they are scammers.
I think an important thing to remember with discernment is that it's nothing is a zero sum game. Yes, most of the things that are immediately thrust into the spotlight are artificially placed and a part of some agenda. But there are some things that do "naturally" attain a lot of attention, and something like this with most people at a fever pitch already with the faggot kiked sham election days away, is perfectly positioned to gain rapid organic attention. I think this is supported by visiting my boomer parents yesterday and neither they nor their two boomer friends heard anything about this. My parent's friends are the "have cnn on 24hrs a day types" and while I've been red pilling my parents with success (my father moreso than my mom) they still get their information through the (((traditional sources))) for the most part. The fact none of them had heard a thing about it says a lot. The (((legacy media))) is now reporting on it, but that's only because they are desperate to latch onto anything that will get eyes. They were late to the game.
All of that combined with the fact that I love animals and hate kikes make this an easy one for me... but as with everything I leave room for the possibility I'm wrong. And I wouldn't be surprised if the story is reversed somehow, but that doesn't mean the new narrative would be the legitimate one. In such situations I think the rough draft was the more truthful one.
Since all of the senior positions of the New York "Department of Environmental Conservation" (as usual an inversion of what they actually do) are kikes, and thus far the only one's I've seen vehemently defending the killings are kikes and faggots on reddit (mostly kikes anyway, and the one's that genetically aren't...are spiritually and thus deserve to share their fate), I'd say they are the most harmed by this.
Who benefits? Well if it's some kind of scam, I suppose the man & woman who had the squirrel & racoon. They seem to have a legitimate rescue organization, but then plenty of those have turned out to be anything but legitimate. Time will tell if they are scammers.
I think an important thing to remember with discernment is that it's nothing is a zero sum game. Yes, most of the things that are immediately thrust into the spotlight are artificially placed and a part of some agenda. But there are some things that do "naturally" attain a lot of attention, and something like this with most people at a fever pitch already with the faggot kiked sham election days away, is perfectly positioned to gain rapid organic attention. I think this is supported by visiting my boomer parents yesterday and neither they nor their two boomer friends heard anything about this. My parent's friends are the "have cnn on 24hrs a day types" and while I've been red pilling my parents with success (my father moreso than my mom) they still get their information through the (((traditional sources))) for the most part. The fact none of them had heard a thing about it says a lot. The (((legacy media))) is now reporting on it, but that's only because they are desperate to latch onto anything that will get eyes. They were late to the game.
All of that combined with the fact that I love animals and hate kikes make this an easy one for me... but as with everything I leave room for the possibility I'm wrong. And I wouldn't be surprised if the story is reversed somehow, but that doesn't mean the new narrative would be the legitimate one. In such situations I think the rough draft was the more truthful one.