Smurfberrys

Your sources are in love with the cooked numbers from the NCMEC, even long after the exposure of their dependence on fabricated statistics.

But then we already pointed out to you the Wall Street Journal's confrontation of the NCMEC with Interpol's denial of the number the NCMEC cited which they claimed was backed by Interpol, their subsequent promise to stop citing the "stat," and their failure to follow their promise to cease citing an invented number.

Now its true that a lot of ignorant yokels haven't done the due diligence, and still believe that the NCMEC isn't a tainted source. But since the NCMEC's poisoned stats back up what the "true believers" want to hear, I will expect to find you to keep quoting sources who swallowed it gullibly, rather than asking the simple question, "Is that so?" which sent many folks on the path to exposing the fraud. It goes to the credibility of a journalist that they never bothered to question how their source got its numbers.

Once you begin to question the dominant narrative, it starts falling apart.

Dante