Squawk and others, So we start with disbelief. Then we attack the message. Then we attack the credibility of the messenger. Then lastly at #147 we do an absolute backflip and say I’m jeopardising the employment of someone who told me something?
‘Mate, doesn’t that completely contradict what you said earlier? Since I’m obviously (according to you) talking BS, exactly whose employment could I be compromising?
I don’t particularly care if I am regarded as an unreliable source, I am not a virologist. However I can be trusted to report what I was told, along with four other people.