This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 79.79.139.50 (talk) at 21:35, 16 November 2024. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 21:35, 16 November 2024 by 79.79.139.50 (talk)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)as I said to you previously, you should do as you please. You've mistakenly thought that I am an arbiter on this issue, or interested in what you have to say regarding it. In the half hour before your last message landed on my Talk page, I read through the material on this topic. It is abundantly clear that it is a nonsense conspiracy theory being touted by...well, instead of insulting anyone explicitly it is sufficient for me to write 'touted by conspiracy theorists', with everything that is implicit in that phrase.
With a legal discovery of this magnitude it's probably better you expose it to a major newspaper or news-channel (they'll pay you millions for a scoop like this). When the New Order arrives I hope you'll be gracious enough to forgive me for completely disregarding you as profound irritation. --Flusapochterasumesch (talk) 21:19, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
It is abundantly clear that it is a nonsense conspiracy theory
And do read WP:NPA. When people stoop to that it invariably means they've lost the argument and don't want to admit it. 79.79.139.50 (talk) 21:35, 16 November 2024 (UTC)