College Debate Team Comes Out Against Debate
James Madison University's debate team says that "free speech should not extend to requiring us to platform or amplify ideas that are exclusionary, discriminatory, or hostile."
This week, the James Madison University debate team made a surprising announcement for, well, a debate team.
The group condemned an upcoming speech on "transgenderism" by conservative commentator Liz Wheeler, arguing that she is "attempting to antagonize and harass highly at-risk groups like transgender students" and calling on the student group sponsoring the event to revoke their support. While there is a lot to criticize about Wheeler's position on transgender people, it's nonetheless troubling that a student group devoted to debate and "free speech" would so fiercely call for the cancellation of an event based purely on a speaker's political beliefs.
Wheeler's event, hosted by JMU's chapter of Young Americans for Freedom (YAF), is set to take place on April 26. The lecture, which has already had to move location due to security concerns, will focus on "the ideology of transgenderism," according to the chapter's social media posts. Soon after the event was announced, many took to social media to express their disapproval and get the university administration to cancel the event.
"Having a woman who spreads hate about trans people come to what is supposed to be a safe space for LGBTQ+ students is sick. jmu is a joke for this," wrote one anonymous Twitter user.
"It is disgusting to see @JMU tout a slogan of 'Be the Change' while allowing a transphobic nut to come to campus and spout harmful lies," one JMU alum tweeted.
Several student and faculty groups also rushed to condemn the event. While many statements simply stated the group's support of transgender students, several made oblique calls for the university administration to intervene, presumably to stop the event.
For example, Madison Equality, an LGBT student group, released a statement arguing in support of "meeting those who disagree with us with patience and empathy." Then it called for students to "make emails and calls to University Administration." Another group added that "a speaker who sits on a platform of hate speech has no place on this campus" and called on students to "remind James Madison University administration about what our expectations of them are."
Despite the backlash, the university administration has stood firmly in support of the event. "That is at the heart of America," Tim Miller, JMU's vice president for student affairs, told a student publication on Thursday. "I can disagree with the speaker, I can disagree with people protesting, but it's our job to provide the forum, both should be able to exist in tandem." As a public university, the school is legally barred from canceling student events based on the speaker's political beliefs.
The JMU debate team's own statement condemning the event, which it released on Wednesday, is a confusing one.
The group says it "stands for free speech, open dialogue, and argument between different perspectives on campus," adding that "no person should be prohibited from expressing their viewpoints in the public sphere." However, the group also wrote that "a general climate of free speech should not extend to requiring us to platform or amplify ideas that are exclusionary, discriminatory, or hostile."
It's unclear how this applies to Wheeler's speech. No one is being "forced" to platform her—she was invited willingly by a student club, which presumably wants to hear what she has to say. Members of JMU's debate team—and anyone else at the university—are perfectly free to simply not attend the event.
The statement was also accompanied by a caption encouraging YAF to cancel the event themselves: "We oppose the support given by groups on the JMU campus to bring Liz Wheeler to speak and we encourage any group offering her support to cease that support immediately."
The statement was quickly met with criticism online, with many pointing out the inherent contradictions in a debate club arguing that some political issues shouldn't be debated.
"This is pretty ironic. From the debate team at a public university named after Federalist Papers author and architect of the US Constitution James Madison," tweeted local journalist Dan McDermott.
"Pitching a fit like this one only backfires," added Reason's Billy Binion. "It makes that speaker a martyr and gets them even more attention. If you don't like someone who is coming to a venue near you, then you should ignore them."
As Binion points out, while there's plenty to criticize about Wheeler's positions on transgender rights—she recently wrote that "'Trans' people are pawns the Marxists are using"—calling for censorship is not only an unprincipled approach, but it's also an ineffective one.
With that in mind, instead of calling for the cancellation of Wheeler's lecture, members of JMU's debate team should try engaging with—and attempting to refute—her ideas.
Huh, what's that called again?
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
How is Wheeler wrong?
Any specifics, Reason?
Great article, Mike. I appreciate your work, I'm now creating over $35,000 dollars each month simply by doing a simple job online! I do know You currently making a lot of greenbacks online from $28,000 dollars, its simple online operating jobs.
.
.
Just open the link--------------------------------------------->>> http://Www.JobsRevenue.Com
Hahaha, a debate club afraid of a debate.
Sounds more like a biased lobby group to me.
They can’t prove what they claim or refute what they deny, sound familiar?
Tell us about how the holocaust didn’t happen.
Hahaha, I have, many times and none of you fuckwits have refuted anything I’ve said.
Zyklon b is totally harmless. You should show us how it couldn't have been used to kill all those people by exposing yourself.
Given the context of the article, I will take 100 miskes over a single one of the trash students. At leat meisk comes out swinging
Hahaha, I bet that hurt.
But it represents the discipline required for debate. To pursue and accept the truth especially when it demonstrates that your current worldview is wrong.
Misek is a miske–er–mistake.
🙂
😉
I picture a child sticking its fingers in its ears and loudly chanting la la la la la la la la......
We've officially gone off the rails.
They are not afraid to debate. They think the are right, and the only ones that can be right. You are wrong if you disagree with them so in their tiny minds so their is no reason to debate. What they are afraid of is a new or different idea that challenges what they believe, it sends them home crying to mommy.
“What they are afraid of is a new or different idea that challenges what they believe,”
The purpose of debate.
They are afraid of debate.
Unless I've completely misunderstood the concept, debaters are judged on their ability to craft the best possible arguments in favor of the point of view they're assigned, even if they don't personally agree with it. Even in informal debates, I find it useful to engage with people I don't agree with. Engaging their opinions and beliefs forces me to clarify my own, whether anyone's mind actually gets changed or not. A debate team that isn't willing to engage with differing viewpoints is kind of like a football team that doesn't want to play if the other team is allowed to tackle them.
Debate is how arguments, conflicts, are resolved in civilization, without coercion.
In academia they manufacture conflicts and some argue as true that which they know isn’t. Much like liars do today.
The shared recognition of truth aka reality concludes arguments, debate, for rational people in civilization. Otherwise, if not truth, nothing decides the “winner” and debates just become infinite incessant nattering. Much like people do today in our post-truth society.
Debate discerns truth. Liars are afraid of truth. Liars are afraid of debate.
Well, your buddies the Nazis didn’t have any debate societies or debates over opposing viewpoints and philosophies since they burned books with ideas and authors they didn’t like, especially Jewish ideas and authors, and the Nazis expelled Jewish Professors and other Professors whose work wasn’t Pro-Nazi.
And once the Nazis took over the Universities, the goal of their Professorial and Student groups and unions was to eliminate anything about German society and culture that was “Un-German.”
Universities in Nazi Germany–Wikipedia
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universities_in_Nazi_Germany
Be It Resolved: Rob Misek can go Fuck Off, Nazi!
Nazis have nothing to do with me, nor I them.
You can’t prove otherwise, Kol Nidre boy because it isn’t true.
You seem to be fixated on Nazism. Do you also recognize the overwhelming similarities between Jews and Nazis?
Jews claim to be the “chosen people” to justify their lying, corruption and terrorism of Palestinians.
Nazis claimed to be the “master race”.
Jews claim ownership of the Freemason satanic secret society based on lying and corruption that has infiltrated the highest levels of government, media and industry today.
Nazis were associated with the Thule secret satanic society.
Jews have ensured that all evidence that refutes the holocaust is a crime to share in every nation where the lie is alleged to have occurred.
Etc etc etc. Hahaha
Well, if the Jews are suppressing alleged refutation of The Holocaust, why can't they do that here in the United States?
There are more Jews in the U.S. than in Israel and in all the European nations where Holocaust Denial is criminalized put together!
If Jews were trying to suppress Holocaust Denial, couldn't they do it better here in the U.S. by sheer numbers and sheer dent of the alleged influence you claim they have?
Try and figure that one out, Mister Aryan Pure Superman Intellect!
And Fuck Off, Nazi!
There are no alleged holocaust sites in the US to require laws to criminalize the evidence that refutes them.
You haven’t refuted anything I’ve already said that refutes the holocaust. It obviously bothers you.
Why don’t you start with that?
Knowing that I value truth and that lies can never be proven gives me the confidence to regularly challenge anyone to either refute anything I say, or accept it. As I do.
Liars do neither.
If, as you claim, The Holocaust was a lie, then Resistance to the Holocaust was a lie too. Why can't you address Holocaust Resistance if you are so confident of the truth of your view?
I'm still waiting. Meanwhile, Fuck Off, Nazi!
There is nothing to resist.
I’m simply sharing the facts that refute the holocaust and expose the lying corrupt nature of the Jewish religion that has benefited from the lie.
Neither you nor anyone else has ever refuted anything I’ve said.
So were the Resistnce fighting residents of The Warsaw Ghetto, of the Sobibor death camp, and the Brothers Bielski and fellow Partizans in Belarus all just shooting and swinging at vapor?
So the Nazis closed an imaginary death camp at Sobibor and rerouted imaginary railroads after Jews had an Uprising in a non-existant death camp?
Goddamn, you are a Big Dummy!
Sanford Dummy Reel
https://youtu.be/moYdbNXBwvk
Fuck Off, Nazi Dummy!
“The Fake Nazi Death Camp: Wikipedia’s Longest Hoax, Exposed”
Jews don’t like copycats.
https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2019-10-04/ty-article-magazine/.premium/the-fake-nazi-death-camp-wikipedias-longest-hoax-exposed/0000017f-e367-d568-ad7f-f36f77000000
Polish Nazi sympathizers building a fake death camp and saying that Poles died there to claim victimhood and distract from their own atrocities doesn't refute the fact that Nazis built real death camps for Jews and others, including Poles!
Nor does this refute the very real atrocities the Nazis did to Poles such as joining with Stalin to tear their nation apart via The Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, a.k.a. The Non-Aggression Pact, or Nazi Eugenics done with kidnapped Polish children!
As London's Late Chief Rabbi Jonathan Sacks observed: The hatred of Jews is never confined to Jews.
And Wikipedia is only as good as it's participants, whereas the words you produce are consistently obscurantist, gas-lighting, irrational bullshit!
Fuck Off, Nazi!
It does show how easy it is to fake a holocaust and to refute it when it isn’t a crime to do so.
As I have demonstrated many times much to your chagrin.
You haven't proven shit except that Nazis and Nazi sympathizers are even bigger pieces of shit than even I had previously thought.
Fuck Off, Nazi!
This might be right down your alley, Misek! The Nazis were big on experiments with body modifications, both deliberately and as a side consequence of starvation in the death camps:
Strange But True: Men Can Lactate
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/strange-but-true-males-can-lactate/
Both instances were involuntary on the part of the subjects of the Nazis, so there's where the similarities end to voluntary adult Transgenderism.
One thing that never resulted from Nazi experiments, however, was the milk of human kindness.
Churn over that one and Fuck Off, Nazi!
It almost makes me want to mute poopypants.
Alas, the bigotry button is not for me.
Yeah, well Nazis were shitting their pants when they ran up against nice little Jewish boys and girls and friends in The Warsaw Ghetto, The Sobibor Death Camp, and the woods of Belarus, who all got sick and tired of being enslaved and murdered by the Nazis and took up arms to fight back!
You can mute hearing about this all you want, but that just means you’re doing the worst kind of lying of all: lying to yourself. And you have never addressed whether these valiant acts of resistance to Nazi tyranny were real or fake! In other words, “you can’t prove what you claim nor refute what you deny!”
So turn yourself in to yourself for lying to yourself, and whether you hear this or not, Fuck Off, Nazi!
On the contrary, I like refuting lies and feeding trolls evidence of truth you can’t refute, laughing every time you choke on it.
Let’s see you refute anything I’ve said, hmmm?
Hahaha.
Reason said criticize, not wrong.
They did provide one: "'Trans' people are pawns the Marxists are using" is apparently something she said. I'm not sure "Marxists" is the right target here, but someone is using them as pawns. Someone will always find a way to use an aggrieved group as pawns. That's kind of how politics works.
Well, it's neo-marxism. Charlie is spinning in his grave.
It's activists creating an interest group in this identitarian democracy, to better share in the spoils. Their pawns used to be called "useful idiots".
"Marxist" is rapidly joining terms such as "fascist" and "socialist" that have been stripped of any actual meaning and redefined basically as "anything I don't like". I seriously doubt most of the people screaming about Marxism know much of anything about Marx or Marxism.
This is completely false.
These people openly describe themselves as Marxists.
The leadership of BLM. Any of the antifa chat groups or any of the elders you find at antifa protests running around preventing people from talking to reporters who are not on their approved lists.... They talk quite frankly in Marxist terms.
They even have other grass roots astroturfing online... There is a huge number of r/placename groups on Reddit that were created by and are run by Marxist activists. They post the same fake questions and articles in every city. "Looking for LGBT friendly hairdresser". "why are there no affordable apartments in (insert local swanky neighborhood)?". "looking for a good Thai restaurant"... And then they mix in stuff about increasing funding for mass transit, funding for the homeless, etc. And then articles critical of local republican politicians.
The comments will be mostly in-group activists pretending to be locals. And they will often slip into overtly Marxist lingo.
That is just one tiny example. "The kids these days" do not see Marxist or Communist as negatives.
*looks around*
I don't understand, how did this happen to our universities?
It’s a mystery that baffles mankind.
No, it's not. Read critiques of progressive philosophy, and even the words of progressives themselves. It will be clear that behind the naive activists are zealots with a deliberate agenda to reform society by taking control of education, both K-12 and higher ed. This is not an accident.
Getting control of the kids has a long history in left wing policy. First were perhaps our own Progressives. Then there were the Commies themselves, in Russia. And, not to forget to include, the Nazis, national socialists after all.
Present day zealots are following a long tradition.
Yeah, only the left... Pretty sure that idea predates the 20th century by a few millennia.
There is a positive side to this story: the University is not canceling the event.
Yeah, the JMU administration does deserve at least few points for not being craven surrender monkeys. If more administrators acted like they had a pair (or any sort of principles), this type of cancel culture never would have gotten off the ground.
>>In response to a controversial campus speaker
controversial is questionable you shouldn't give in to the narrative. fight the power.
The word, controversial, has a plain meaning. You can't just say something isn't controversial because you disagree with one of the sides in the controversy.
And eat a bullet has a clear meaning. You should commit suicide
When are the assertions of trans activism deemed "controversial" in a knee-jerk fashion like the dissenters to it are?
They are controversial. Trans activism is questioned by all kinds of people: JK Rowling, Jordan Peterson, conservative pundits across the country, pretty much daily at Fox.
The students there would consider anyone anti- trans as “controversial”. So I’m not sure how this proves your point.
Not "anti trans"... But "not on board with every broad assertion of trans activists", such as the biggest: trans women are women. fully and truly women in every sense, indestinguishable from any other woman in any way.
This is where Rowling and Navratilova ran afoul. They said that there are times when one might draw a line between the trans and cis women... Like in professional sports, or in women's rape shelters.
If you can cull off a 98% to 2% disagreement and call it "controversial" to hold the 98% view (in a pejorative sense), you really do have the strongest of hecklers vetos.
She's a wholehearted perpetrator of the lefty narrative, why would she resist.
if I'm going to spend four seconds rtfa I'd like better a's
Sounds like you're ready to join the debate team.
Wheeler's event, hosted by JMU's chapter of Young Americans for Freedom (YAF)
Perhaps it's the sponsor they're opposed to, as much as the speaker.
I remodelled $700 per day exploitation my mobile partly time. I recently got my fifth bank check of $19632 and every one i used to be doing is to repeat and paste work online. This home work makes Pine Tree State able to generate more money daily simply straightforward to try and do work and regular financial gain from this are simply superb.
.
Here what i’m doing. strive currently………………..>>> http://www.jobsrevenue.com
With that in mind, instead of calling for the cancellation of Wheeler's lecture, members of JMU's debate team should try engaging with—and attempting to refute—her ideas.
Huh, what's that called again?
Systemic Racism?
You're wrong. In this case, it's mansplaining.
How dare you say I'm wrong without looking where I am on the progressive stack!
And the award for Best Snowflake Team goes to...
It's an n-way tie!
While there is a lot to criticize about Wheeler's position on transgender people
'She's a woman with an opinion and not much more needs to be said about that' eh, Emma?
That white man in the girl's locker room has a long history of oppression and discrimination.
What do you tell to a woman with 2 black eyes?
Nothing, you already told her twice!
While there is a lot to criticize about Wheeler’s position on transgender people,
You know, I’ve only got so many hours in the day, and Reason has a long history of this shit. I’m not familiar with Ms. Wheeler, is there a lot to criticize about her position on transgender people?
If she'd called for them to be culled, it would have been mentioned, and not just hinted at. So my guess is the claim is bullshit.
Would calling for a culling of a violent insane cult be criticized?
This isn't picking or bitching. I mean this as a genuine piece of heartfelt advice. Emma, and all the other writers here, have to stop with this shit. It's bad writing.
If there's something to criticize, criticize it. Or at least inform us of what it is that makes them "controversial" or worthy of criticism. We don't need vague statements, we need to know specifically where the controversy stems. If you cannot offer that much, don't include it at all. This half assed disclaimer tells us nothing. It reeks of bias, and it strongly undermines your moral authority as an arbiter of facts.
Here's how the world reads these sort of articles. As it stands, just about ANYONE not heterodox progressive is labeled "controversial". Likewise, somehow, the progressives are not labeled as such. Your cowtowing "plenty to criticize" disclaimers puts you in the progressive's camp.
Those of us who find the transgender activists that this speaker criticizes to be offensive might be similarly distraught at their views. So, are they controversial? Is there plenty for them to be criticized about? If not, then it looks as though you completely disregard my views, and have no respect for my feelings on the matter. That's no way to persuade anyone.
Drop this shit, check your own biases, and grow some balls. You don't need to add a disclaimer before stating the point of your article. Just state it. You're, theoretically at least, trying to advocate a pro-free-speech position. Act as though you really believe in it.
Well stated.
X2
100% agree. This is the Robby throat clear 2.0.
It is lame. Plus, you write an article accepting their premise that she is a bad person, but completely fail to name a single thing even mildly off-putting about her. This is a total fail.
Apparently, suggesting that there such a thing as a trans ideology and that it is aligned with Marxist philosophy is something to criticize for reasons so obvious they need not be explained.
"It is disgusting to see @JMU tout a slogan of 'Be the Change' while allowing a transphobic nut to come to campus and spout harmful lies," one JMU alum tweeted.
If this is the default position, how is true debate even possible?
Are you pro marxism or super pro marxism.
Doubleplus pro marxism comrade.
I remodelled $700 per day exploitation my mobile partly time. I recently got my fifth bank check of $19632 and every one i used to be doing is to repeat and paste work online. This home work makes Pine Tree State able to generate more money daily simply straightforward to try and do work and regular financial gain from this are simply superb.
.
Here what i’m doing. strive currently………………..>>> http://www.jobsrevenue.com
So do they truly not understand their position is exclusionary, discriminatory, and hostile?
I didn't think so.
There is only one way to stop bullies.
Progressives -- at least the useful idiot ones -- are irony impaired.
The folks who can profit from the hullabaloo totes understand. They just don't give a shit because they can get away with it in the current academic/media climate. To them it's like saying "God is good" on the pulpit, nobody in the choir will refute the statement.
Great article. I love the humor. Keep it up.
No surprise there. The left has always been Faulty Advertisements. From pretending they are about Liberty, to calling their opposition Nazi's while openly lobbying for [Na]tional So[zi]alism, to calling *earners* crooks and crooks discriminated against.. The list is endless....
Watching a leftarded "free speech" club monitor speech should be of ZERO surprise at this point.
I’m right, you're wrong, no need to debate!
Yeah that kind of thinking should move the country forward.
It will! "Forward into the Past!" ... "Onward, Lemmings! over the edge!"
All The Same?
All the young are not the same in terms of squashing free speech and inadvertently promoting Fascism while screaming against it. There are some who rise above the indoctrination rampant in academia. I know of one student at an Ivy-League, left-leaning university who bought the novel, Inescapable Consequences. The book is unique in taking a scientific perspective towards the four cornerstones of any society; namely, government, law, education, and medical delivery. So, there is hope.
"Hope springs eternal in the human breast; Man never is, but always To be Blest." -Alexander Pope (1688-1744)
Funny thing, the Academia and society of your beloved Antebellum South allowed no debate and no freedom of expression of Abolitionist or Libertarian ideas. In fact, these ideas weren't even allowed to circulate though the mail and it was a capital offense in Slave States to teach slaves to read and write.
"Hope" and "blessing" sure as Hell didn't "spring eternal" for slaves and Abolitionists until "The Peculiar Institution" was eliminated from our borders. Others beyond our borders where slavery is still legal still have no "Hope" and "blessing" springing eternal.
Your pious and pseudoscientific bullshit can do no better.
Fuck Off, Ku Klux Krud!
You can't fight here, gentlemen—this is the War Room!
I hope she videotapes it (no Blair Witch Project) start to finish and brings sufficient muscle in case they try to hold her hostage in a room for three hours while rent a cops stand around and do nothing. It's sad to say this, but the success or failure of this will depend on what message is 'sent' after the speech.
The Administration should respond in words that The Debate Team (TM) can understand: "You student - me teacher - siddown - listen."
It is hard to understand a mindset that enables a student profess a quest for knowledge while simultaneously preselecting what knowledge is acceptable to them.
Their brainwashing is so deep and so 'sticky' that they have no ability to self-heal. They are warped for life. Damaged. Demented. Handicapped by their handlers. They are unable to recognize their own brand of divisive, hate-fueled, destructive, exclusionary, discriminatory and hostile speech...which seems to be the ONLY speech they are capable of.
So twice you call out her positions on transgender politics as being somehow objectionable, but the only complaint you and Binion can combine to put forward is:
"—she recently wrote that "'Trans' people are pawns the Marxists are using""
You gotta give us more than that.... How is that possibly something to criticize? It is unquestionably true. Perhaps you guys don't read what the CWPA is doing, but they don't really hide it. They are quite active and well funded these days. And these sorts of provocations are par for the course.
I don't even get the critique. Are we objecting to the description because we think it means people are not really trans and they are just communists who are faking it? That would be a stupid interpretation. I have no idea who this person is, but I can guarantee that this isn't what is meant.
Or perhaps it is that there are no Marxists involved? That clearly isn't true. Even a cursory listen to the activists at the front of the column will let you know that they are Marxists. Hint: anyone claiming the Antifa label is a Marxist. Antifa has been all over the drag show for families and drag storytime protests. They have also been neck deep in the whole "this hospital doesn't do transition surgery on kids" thing.
So why the throat clear? If that is your only articulable critique, why are you even deigning to call her controversial??
I would have thought she called them all pedophiles, or maybe they are a bunch of fetishist rapists, or something equally insulting and broad in sweep. But "being used by Marxists??". How can you even pretend that this is not the case, let alone somehow so offensive as to drive an honest interlocutor to call for her to be silenced?
The fact that this article is about a debate team afraid of debate is poignant to how our society addresses every conflict.
Knowing that truth can be proven while lies never can be is why the concept of debate was developed by civilized humanity in the first place. It does set us apart from animals who use the criteria of coercion not truth to “win” conflicts.
In a post-truth woke cancel culture society all we have is coercion. In it, coercion is considered noble and debate seeking truth is to be reviled.
This bigoted disregard for truth has always been our greatest weakness and enemy.
The truth aka reality is the only thing we all share in peace. Only the civilized and principled use of debate brings us there without coercion.
Yet these “debate students” are afraid to refute what they deny or prove what they claim. Sound familiar?
See my replies above and below.
And Fuck Off, Nazi!
Hahaha
James Madison University's debate team says that "free speech should not extend to requiring us to platform or amplify ideas that are exclusionary, discriminatory, or hostile."
OK. However, by that standard, it DOES NOT allow you to silence ANYONE as attempting to do so is exclusionary, discriminatory, AND hostile.
I think they wouldn’t allow your argument either.
When they grow up they’re going to criminalize evidence that proves they’re lying.
You mean like you would criminalize anyone who asserts spoken, written, photographed, filmed, and forensic evidence proving The Holocaust was real?
Fuck Off, Nazi!
There is zero irrefutable proof of a holocaust.
I have refuted the holocaust lie many many times and nobody, especially you has ever refuted the truth that I’ve shared.
Prove otherwise. Hahaha.