Chiang Rai

It's shame really. The three of them could have contributed to debate, but were into name-calling and ridiculing. Perhaps they knew they were simply wrong.

...or he ran out of insults...

I do not see any question mark at the end of your sentence cause we know the answer to that, don't we? I have written many times that some here are replying to comments they do not read or understand, in this case it is very clear. Indeed a reply to a comment saying something and then the opposite the next sentence, a comment which he clearly did not read (properly) or did not understand but hey, "amen". This happens again and again on many topics, not sure why some feel the need to reply to every single topics, including indeed the many ones they know nothing about.

Uhm, no shit, Sherlock. Did you deduce all by yourself that evidence only results from investigations and since no MSM outlet investigates any of this then that would mean you could never expect them to produce any evidence? You deserve a Gold Star for that brilliant epiphany. As the corruption in the world has become endemic and seeped into almost every major once respected and trusted institution to produce a myriad of different forms of criminality it has become increasingly difficult for the criminals to hide their criminality. So they've enlisted the once respected and trusted but now thoroughly corrupted MSM, who were once called America's 4th branch of government serving as another check and balance for exposing criminality and calling it out publicly, to create misleading and obfuscating narratives to continue to fool and mislead the rubes as to their true machinations. But that has not been quite effective enough. And so the misnomered "fact-checking" industry was recently birthed into existence. Not to verify the truth of anything, of course, but rather to debunk the truth and pass off the propagandist narrative as the "real" truth. Media Bias Fact Check is one such "fact-checker" designed as an adjunct to those "fact-checkers" who debunk only particular stories, information and opposing viewpoints. This appendix was instead specifically designed for the purpose of debunking actual trustworthy news sources. Which made the job of fact-checkers easier as they could now cite as well that the debunked truth originated from an untrustworthy source who is falsely accused of frequently engaging in lies and "conspiracy theories." This specialized "fact-checking" industry fitted extremely well with the also recent phenomenon in the west of censorship. For now any and every debunked news outlet or source could be censored anywhere. Such as forums. You know what I'm talking about, don't you Grumpish? The corrupted MSM is used as the propagandist narrative builders. Fact checkers are created to debunk the truth and discredit those speaking the truth and to malign the sources of the truth while simultaneously bolstering the false narratives. The term mis/disinformation is born. Censorship is employed, using as justification the fight to combat "harmful" mis/disinformation. Social media is retooled to quell the voices of those speaking truth by labeling them as mis/disinformation spreaders and so justifiably banning them. Terms of art such as "conspiracy theorist," "nut job," "delusional," "MAGA," and your personal favourite, "loon" are liberally (pun intended) applied to anyone who dare challenge officialdom's narratives. You were born with a brain, Grumpish, so I ask you: why don't you use it? Consider this: every individual has bias and their individual and unique belief system. All information that anyone receives is first screened and then interpreted through their bias and personal beliefs before they pass it on; personally colourised now. When you are accepting information from "fact-checkers, both those who "fact-check" stories and information and those who "fact-check" news sources, you are not getting raw information. What you are receiving, at best, is filtered information. At worst you are receiving tailored information. Anyone who uses "fact-checkers," for either verification of information or to make a determination as to trusted sources, is someone who is basically admitting that they are incapable of determining for themselves what is real in the world and what is not. They are admitting they are incapable of determining for themselves what is true and what is false. They are abdicating their reasoning power to others and blindly accepting someone else's "truth." For the sake of convenience, they make argue. Your erreur fatale, Grumpish, is that you believe that those with differing viewpoints than your own are stupid idiots. Liberals are famous for accusing others of what they themselves are doing. In that sense it is highly ironic that in your unwittingness you accuse others of stupidity, or subtly/not-so-subtly suggest it, when it is instead your own stupidity which has you make this erreur fatale. My humble advice to you, Grumpish, is to use your own brain and begin sussing out for yourself what is true reality and what is fiction and lies.

"High Quality" people? We suppose you mean other than us long-term residents on 'Retirement Visas' who contribute to their respective communities through their savings etc. 90 day reporting is a 'piece of piss' as y'all call it due to the wonders of the internet.