Either you do not understand me, or you purposely move away from my question. I ask you specific question,
1) How to you tell which source is accurate? Which is not?
And from what I understand from your explanation, those that was given by Deputy Head is accurate, those not are not accurate?
2) You say in your previous post that there is a different between media and Rostec, so I take it that whatever Rostec said is accurate, which obviously is not because Rostec echoe what CCTV had mentioned before. And if they are that accurate, then they should not have mentioned it. And so... I deduce that Rostec is also not 100% accurate. Am I correct to say it?
3) You conveniently left out the link that I have linked before on Rostec echoing CCTV. And I said that it is not accurate because that had been debunked by the Russian themselves.
4) You claim that I am covering my track, so my next few questions are... what track? I linked from Rostec and Russian media themselves, I have mentioned before, my sources are not Chinese (not even CCTV), not westerns, not Singapore, but Russian. And I am not covering anything, just falling back to the first question (See below).
So... you tell me, what am I suppose to trust? Simple question. If you don't know, just say so. Nobody's going to point a gun at your head.
Yes, I do not know what was Rostec, thus my search into that matter is quite limited, but from that limited search, I notice discrepancy which make me think that that source is also not accurate (or a better word... too accurate).
As to your consistence claim that people have to be polite to you, let me tell you something, respect needed to be earn, like the respect many forumers here have (eg. Crobato, Bd poyeye, Jeff, Airforce brat, Engineer, and many more) and I talk to them with utmost respect and politeness. You on the other hand... well... since you never give anyone of us any respect to start with, why the hell should any of us give you the respect and manner that you demand and accuse others of not giving because they don't share your point of view?
And again with non-related links, taking that as proof of the accuracy of a source... what to say? Even tabloid get it right sometime don't you think? Secondly, what you said are either Russia's own internal affair and news that was international whereby every darn reporters got assess to... and that is suddenly proof of a source accuracy? If you want that as proof of accuracy... I can also show you accurate news from the notoriously non-accurate wforum.com or wikipedia and if by your theory... then wforum and wikipedia are accurate sources too. Then we should be reading from those rather than doing other researches.
Again... I am buffled, but I don't want to get pulled in to another meaningless argument on totally unrelated topics.
Plus you accuse me of slandering you. Did I? If yes, I apologise. But frankly I don't see how I have slander you? In read through my post, what I claim of you is pretty accurate. So seriously if you think I have done that... then basic manner in me, told me that I should apologise to you again, is that polite enough for someone who is always holding on to a high moral ground?
