@vikorr,
vikorr wrote:Fact: Christian Cooper said something like 'you won't like the outcome Fact Christian Cooper offered Amy Cooper's dog a dog treat. Fact: Christian Cooper engaged in no physical act of violence, remained calm of voice and body, and asked her not to approach him him multiple times....but you ignored these facts, to use hyperbole / demonise him:
Wrong. Facts and reality are not hyperbole.
vikorr wrote:They do have the right to kill people who try to murder their pets. (Cooper in fact did not try to murder her pet - so hyperbole / demonisation).
He made a threat against her pet and then tried to act on it. It was perfectly reasonable for her to assume that her pet was under attack.
So you are lying again. There was no hyperbole and no demonization.
vikorr wrote:White people have every right to protect themselves when black people try to murder them (Cooper in fact did not try to murder her - so hyperbole / demonisation).
Given your history of lying about what I say, I'm going to assume that you are lying about me saying this in context of the birdwatcher thug.
I'll be happy to address it further if you actually establish that I did say it in the context of the birdwatcher thug.
vikorr wrote:That thug attacked her pet and she should have shot him in self defense and then walked away (Cooper in fact did not attack her pet. So hyperbole / demonisation)
Trying to lure someone's pet away from them in a hostile context is an attack.
So you are lying again. There was no hyperbole and no demonization.
vikorr wrote:White people have the right to protect themselves when black people try to rape or murder them. (Cooper in fact did not try to rape or murder her - so hyperbole / demonisation)
Given your history of lying about what I say, I'm going to assume that you are lying about me saying this in context of the birdwatcher thug.
I'll be happy to address it further if you actually establish that I did say it in the context of the birdwatcher thug.
vikorr wrote:There were also multiple instances of you calling him an Axe Murderer, violent, etc.
Surprise surprise. You are lying again. I never called him an axe murderer.
What I said was that after you have menaced a woman (who doesn't know you) to the extent that she identifies you as a probable axe murderer, there is no way to have her sit down with you so you can explain to her that you mean no harm. Your only option is to withdraw completely.
I was responding to your bizarre and delusional suggestion that Amy Cooper might have considered sitting down and having a pleasant conversation with the thug who was actively menacing her.
vikorr wrote:(Cooper in fact, engaged in no act of violence, could never reasonably be argued to have tried to murder her, and had no axe, so hyperbole/demonisation)
No. When you lie about what I say, that is neither hyperbole nor demonization (at least, not on my part).
vikorr wrote:30 odd links to oralloy quotes from Arbery/McMichaels case - where he constantly used subjective words that both attacked the dead victim Martin and defended the killer McMichaels.
You are lying. I never attacked the dead jogger guy.
Of course I defend the McMichaels. They have every right to be safe from from dangerous threats.
vikorr wrote:Which says you focused on race.
Only when race is the topic of discussion (such as when I am condemning your racism).
vikorr wrote:It's very possible to not be racist by saying 'anyone has the right to self defense'.
Condemning your racism is not racist.
You are a racist for thinking that it even could be.
vikorr wrote:You do the same implicitly when you keep defending only white people who are in conflict with black people / using subjective words only in favour of the white people and always against the black people.
When you racists attack white people, white people will be the ones who are defended.
vikorr wrote:you never return the same favour or linking such evidence.
You are lying again. I am always happy to provide links to support my arguments.
