Ephoron

Its the one that coincides with a concern of mine, yes.

Do you comment on absolutely everything regardless of whether it interests you or not?

Are you suggesting that the mere fact of being more interested in some issues than others indicates some kind of unreasonable level of fantisicm?

So "no firm conclusions" means what, in terms of the other comments here?

As far as I can tell, people are understandably a bit troubled, and a bit cross (since some of the proposed causes probably should have been dealt with a lot earlier). They're maybe hastily jumping to theories about a few likely candidates. Do you blame them?

Or should we just do nothing? Wait, and put all our faith in...? What?

The vast majority of the things mentioned would do us absolutely no harm at all to avoid, or even legislate against as a precaution. So is there a good reason we should wait for "firm" conclusions?

None of it is 'clear', and of course we don't 'know'. The question is what on earth you have on your list of reasons to give Antony Blinken the benefit of the doubt.

I'd love to know what it is about his record in office that inspires such trust.

Honestly, the level of fawning obsequiousness to the government these days is like something from Mccarthy's America, I thought we'd moved on as a society.

The point isn't whether he actually did approve bombing aid trucks. The point is that he, like any government official, should be terrified of the response if he did, because it's only that fear that reigns in the abuse of power.

Do you think Antony Blinken is going to be terrified of "oh, we don't have absolutely conclusive proof he actually said those exact words so we'll just drop it"?