We should always aspire to directly consider the evidence and not immediately attempt to resort to CIA-weaponized language. That includes, of course “conspiracy theory” as if someone is properly demanding that the speaker first needs to get that crazy monkey off his back before his or her real evidence may be considered.
Your approach is a lot like a manifestation of humblegunner’s standard tact, despite this not being a blogger’s post to get traffic.
Maybe, I didn’t read the article. just some of the excerpt. But that was the image that came to mind. Just a hodgepodge of crap.
I doubt any of it can be proven. So is likely a complete waste of time. But enjoy whatever evidence he provides.
hmmm, well it looks like I gave you a maybe, still didn’t read the article, and then doubled down on my opinion. Well that’s where I’m at.