Guns: how much longer will it take ....

The minutae of the words within their context dude - this shouldn't need to be spelled out for you. Ie.:
- If 20 definitions saying the same thing, you will choose half a sentence that is vague, focus on it, and say 'see I was right'....while ignoring the whole which shows otherwise (to your opinions)

- You do exactly the same for the Coopers incident...focus on just two parts of the whole (which by themselves are vague), then ignore the rest (the context) to arrive at your conclusion...ie. you focus on the minutae.

Hardly make it any less true, now would it.

As for the rest - you continue to illustrate that which I said....you just don't appear to comprehend it.

Bullshit. He had told here where she could go with her dog and not violate the law as she was doing there. She refused, So clearly she would not like it if she had to follow the law

Amy refuses, and the law blew up in her face, deservedly.

and you of course fantasize a racist scenario. As you always do.

Mind you he does the same for all his other posts where white people are in conflict with black people. He will only focus on anything that favours the white people...

He claims otherwise, but refuses to show <read can't show> anywhere on this forum where he has focused on things that favour the black person <when they are in conflict with a white person> - and he has posted in a lot of such threads.

He then says he would punch anyone in the nose that called him racist IRL. This behaviour wouldn't of course, change the overt racist slant of his posts.

Nope. Read refuses to show. I'm not going to play your game of proving that I'm not a racist.

Then you have nothing at all to prove that I am wrong.

On the other side, pretty much every time you contribute to a thread where a white person & a black person are in conflict...you behave the way I said you behave, and prove what I claim.

It only takes you showing:
- understanding of a black persons perspective (rather than only the white persons); or
- understand of the black persons feelings (rather than only the white persons); or
- admitting to some things the white person also did wrong (rather than only the black persons); or
- etc
It should be pretty easy if you aren't racist.

Only thing is - you don't do any of these. It is all solely one sided.

Quite frankly, I would have thought that since I first asked you to link such a post - that you would have found another thread <of similar conflict> where you could at least pretend to be empathetic towards a black person <who is/was in conflict with a white person>. Or haven't you been able to bring yourself to do that?

What part of "I'm not going to play your game of proving myself innocent" are you too stupid to understand?

Of course you do, ie. that you have an IQ of 170.

The only way you could honestly believe that is if your mother somehow tricked you into believing it, and you never questioned it... But you're an adult now...

There's no appeal to a crowd - it is a simple statement of fact.

No one believes you have an IQ of 170. There's very good reason for this - it is very, very obvious you don't have high intelligence.

What I don't get about the claim is that it is pointless
- it makes you look idiotic
- it causes people to mock you
- it contributes nothing to any argument
- it doesn't bolster any argument of yours (it actually undermines them for you)

it just undermines you in your own head - because you know it's not true.

Ugh...yet again proving lower IQ.

It would be a logical fallacy if I was arguing why your intelligence was low, or how.

I was simply saying no one else believes the lie you tell yourself.

There is no why / how or other thing that logic requires. It is logically, a statement (rather than an argument). It is also fact - it is fact noone else believes it.

Please show that you aren't stupid enough to not understand the difference between a logic argument and a statement.