Hacker News Reader

A masterful exhibition of reasoning! Let me see if I follow:

Premise 1) If there was a pedophile conspiracy, the conspirators would try to poison the well with easily discredited witnesses.

Premise 2) The only evidence of a pedophile conspiracy comes from a single completely discredited witness.

Conclusion) Therefore, the pedophile conspiracy definitely happened.

View on HN

> Premise 2) The only evidence of a pedophile conspiracy comes from a single completely discredited witness.

This is an artifact of selective perception and contradicted by both evidence and the public record.

As I follow it, you're the one arguing it definitely didn't happen, based on one discredited witness, when there's evidence going back decades of abuse by political, military and intelligence figures in children's homes across Britain and Northern Ireland, and cover ups going all the way to the Prime Minister.

And what's the alternative to 1? That the Establishment commits suicide by allowing investigations capable of destroying (all public faith and confidence in) the Establishment? I'd love to know why that would ever happen.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com