Facebook VP on ad boycott: We have 'no incentive' to allow hate speech.

@McGentrix,

Thank you McGentrix! I will try to behave myself better.

0 Replies

@McGentrix,

Do you mind if I express my opinion about these two provocateurs and I might add your name to that list. While you are more rational than them you never the less often post BS like your last post.

0 Replies

@McGentrix,

McGentrix wrote:

He's an athlete who tried using his celebrity to forward a cause he thought was justifiable.

The cause that he thinks is justifiable is allowing black people to murder police officers and white people with impunity.

McGentrix wrote:

He is not racist or a thug and he does not support murdering police officers.

Support for murdering white people: racist
Support for murdering police officers and white people: thug
Support for murdering police officers: supports murdering police officers

He checks all three boxes.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Quote:

Support for murdering white people: racist
Support for murdering police officers and white people: thug
Support for murdering police officers: supports murdering police officers

He checks all three boxes.

Ok.... oh you of great intelligence who only speak in facts of whom we marvel at your wisdom.

Can you back up any one of these claims?

Show me where Kaepernick has ever supported murdering White people.

Or shut-up (which is part of your 3 S's after all)

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

Show me where Kaepernick has ever supported murdering White people.

He supports Black Lives Matter.

Allowing black people to murder white people is one of their core themes.

They aren't just about murdering police officers.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Quote:

He supports Black Lives Matter.

Allowing black people to murder white people is one of their core themes.

You are in a hole, lets dig deeper.

Are you stating, as a fact, that anyone who supports Black Lives Matter supports murdering White People?

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

Well, they want black people to be allowed to murder white people.

They may not wish to carry out the murders themselves.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

oralloy wrote:

Well, they want black people to be allowed to murder white people.

They may not wish to carry out the murders themselves.

Ok... so you are stating this as a fact.

Anyone who supports Black Lives Matters want "black people to be allowed to murder white people".

(correct me if this is not what you claim is a fact).

That means that if I can find someone who supports Black Lives Matters who doesn't want "black people to be allowed to murder white people", that will disprove your claim. In that case, would you admit that your claim isn't a "fact"?

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

Ok... so you are stating this as a fact.

Anyone who supports Black Lives Matters want "black people to be allowed to murder white people".

(correct me if this is not what you claim is a fact).

Close enough. We could get more accurate by wording it a lot more ponderously, but let's keep the wording simple and go with that.

Yes, I say that.

maxdancona wrote:

That means that if I can find someone who supports Black Lives Matters who doesn't want "black people to be allowed to murder white people", that will disprove your claim. In that case, would you admit that your claim isn't a "fact"?

Note that "support for Black Lives Matter" is concrete proof that someone wants to allow black people to murder white people.

So if you were to produce such a person, my most likely response would be to point out that you are wrong about what they want.

That might still be a useful conversation though, if you come to realize what horrible people BLM goons are.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Quote:

Note that "support for Black Lives Matter" is concrete proof that someone wants to allow black people to murder white people.

So if you were to produce such a person, my most likely response would be to point out that you are wrong about what they want.

That's the very definition of circular reasoning. Your "facts" are true because they are true and you reject any evidence that disproves them as false because your "facts" are true.

This is why it is impossible to have a factual discussion with you.

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

It is the nature of reality that it is true, and that stuff the contradicts it is false.

Let's try this:

I think that anyone who supports an organization, supports the goals of that organization.

Do you agree or disagree?

1 Reply

@oralloy,

That's circular reasoning. It is true because it is true.

I would say anyone who supports an organization supports their understanding of the goals of that organization. If I support an organization, but the leaders have an agenda of which I am not aware, that says nothing about me.

1 Reply

By the way... I present myself as the evidence that refutes your ridiculous claim.

1. I support Black Lives Matter.
2. I don't support allowing Black people to murder White people (which makes sense since I am in fact White and live in a community with plenty of Black people).

That is proof that your claim of "fact" is (in fact) wrong.

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

Your two claims about yourself are contradictory. A set of contradictory claims doesn't prove me wrong.

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

I would say anyone who supports an organization supports their understanding of the goals of that organization. If I support an organization, but the leaders have an agenda of which I am not aware, that says nothing about me.

Isn't it kind of foolish to support an organization without knowing what they are all about?

If I didn't know that the Nazis were all about genocide and murder, and I started going around saying what great people they were, shouldn't there be a point where I am responsible for learning what they are all about?

And if I avoid educating myself and I go around supporting Nazis in ignorance, am I not still ultimately responsible for the positions that I advocate?

If you would like an example of BLM goons striving to prevent white people from protecting themselves from black aggression, look at the case of Amy Cooper.

A black man was threatening her in the park, and she called the police and truthfully described everything that was happening, and for merely calling the police when she was being threatened she has had her career destroyed and is being prosecuted.

Another example is George Zimmerman. They tried hard to lynch him for justifiably defending himself from a murder attempt.

Another example is Jillian and Eric Wuestenberg from the Detroit suburbs a couple days ago.

0 Replies

@oralloy,

oralloy wrote:

Your two claims about yourself are contradictory. A set of contradictory claims doesn't prove me wrong.

The reason they are contradictory is because your fact is false.

You just won't ever accept that your facts are wrong. You just keep repeating to yourself that "all my facts are correct... all my facts are correct... because my facts are correct... because they are correct".

Intelligence means being able to change your mind once the evidence clearly contradicts what you are claiming are "facts". Instead, you just stick with your facts and assume that reality is wrong.

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

The reason they are contradictory is because your fact is false.

That is incorrect. They are contradictory because they oppose each other. Only one of the two statements can be true.

maxdancona wrote:

You just won't ever accept that your facts are wrong.

That is a reasonable position to take when my facts are all correct.

maxdancona wrote:

You just keep repeating to yourself that "all my facts are correct... all my facts are correct... because my facts are correct... because they are correct".

Well, it's true.

maxdancona wrote:

Intelligence means being able to change your mind once the evidence clearly contradicts what you are claiming are "facts".

You have not presented any such evidence.

maxdancona wrote:

Instead, you just stick with your facts and assume that reality is wrong.

Just the opposite. I assume that reality is real.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Quote:

That is incorrect. They are contradictory because they oppose each other. Only one of the two statements can be true.

And yet they are both true.

Is it possible for you to admit that there is a flaw in your thinking.

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

Not when there is no flaw in my thinking.

I did write a post addressing your claim that someone might support a group without knowing what the group stands for.

As far as I can see you haven't responded to it.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

There is an obvious flaw in your thinking.

- It is a demonstrable fact that I publically support Black Lives Matter.

- It is also a fact that I don't want allow Black people to kill White people (being a White person myself).

Rather than deal with the contradiction in your belief system, you deny clear facts. The post you made doesn't address this (although my position on this stays the same as when I already made the original point).

1 Reply

Facebook VP on ad boycott: We have 'no incentive' to allow hate speech.

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know