Elixir
Made in America
Yeah, no need to get all freaked out. It's not like crackpots actually vote, y'know.
-
Features
Michigan militia members arrested for planning kidnap of Governor Whitmire
- Thread starter southernhybrid
- Start date
Yeah, no need to get all freaked out. It's not like crackpots actually vote, y'know.
Jason Harvestdancer
Contributor
Did I say they were right, or did I say that was one of the stories out there?
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2002
- Messages
- 38,930
- Location
- Frozen in Michigan
- Gender
- Old Fart
- Basic Beliefs
- Don't be a dick.
fromderinside
Mazzie Daius
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2008
- Messages
- 15,945
- Basic Beliefs
- optimist
Why not? They do it with anyone knowingly working with a cult. They do. They ....
Lord, what's a cult?
Lord, what's a cult?
Shadowy Man
Contributor
The defense says they didn’t do it? Well, in that case...
Coleman Smith
Member
A prosecuter that get a conviction in this case needs to become a cab driver.
You think they are though, right? I mean you're coming in with the defense's statement, but rather than simply posting the link and quote you're dropping the 'accuse me of agreeing' bullshit - which where I come from is a passive-aggressive way of saying something without saying it. Woe is Jason. Mind you just a few posts prior you dropped in what resembled unsourced apologia for them. Not that anyone was convinced by it, but claiming that there was entrapment when there's no evidence of entrapment, or that one of the people was an Antifa member (as if they're a membership granting organization) without some source just strikes everyone as a bit curious, considering they're empirical matters. That is, it's not something your lofty Libertarian intellect could have reasoned out from the law of identity and tiddlywink music.
You have to have heard these things somewhere. Is there a reason you're not willing to share your sources with us? Or would that be giving the game away?
Jason Harvestdancer
Contributor
In post #99 I shared the source. In post #108 you accused me of not being willing to share the source.
Jarhyn
Wizard
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2010
- Messages
- 14,687
- Gender
- Androgyne; they/them
- Basic Beliefs
- Natural Philosophy, Game Theoretic Ethicist
More, if you drop something and don't give context, that is agreement. The only way to make posting a statement from someone not constitute an agreement is to actually, you know, disagree.
See, this is what I keep talking about, making appeals to emotion and never committing any truth value. This is not rational discussion, it is not the purview or function of this forum to "debate" in such a way.
If you merely post ideas and shy away from any actual conversation on their merits, you are merely acting in that moment as a floor-shitting animal.
But hey, while we have right wing extremists in terrorist "militias" attempting to abduct the governor of Michigan so they can conduct a kangaroo court and summary execution following Trump's admonitions that they do so, nevermind that, we have people throwing milkshakes, punching nazis, and mildly inconveniencing the police! Oh, the humanity.
Jason Harvestdancer
Contributor
So you are saying I agree with all five of the statements below?
Yet statement 1 & 2 rather contradict, and statement 3 & 4 rather don't exactly agree with each other. According to you I am supposed to believe 1 & 2, and I am supposed to believe 3 & 4. At the same time. Because I posted both versions of the narrative, not just one side.
Jarhyn
Wizard
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2010
- Messages
- 14,687
- Gender
- Androgyne; they/them
- Basic Beliefs
- Natural Philosophy, Game Theoretic Ethicist
I can absolutely say you agree with shitting on the floor.
You could absolutely clear some things up by, you know, actually commenting with what you actually believe
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2002
- Messages
- 38,930
- Location
- Frozen in Michigan
- Gender
- Old Fart
- Basic Beliefs
- Don't be a dick.
I don't know where you got debate lessons, but saying 'my own statements are contradictory' when pressed for a source is not a winning argument. These are all factual claims, and nothing in the link in post #99 supports any of those claims. Indeed, mere self contradiction isn't enough in a political forum, namely in the Trump era. More they're not 'sides to a narrative'. The moon landing being real, or it being recorded on a soundstage by Stanly Kubrick are different sides of a narrative. Anyone who's witnessed a person with swastika tattoos buying drugs from a non-white person knows it's not an impossibility but merely a case of curious bedfellows.
None of this is according to anyone but you. Not only are you incapable of making a clear point, but when pressed to clarify you always play the just-asking-questions saying-stuff-without-saying-it 'everyone is so mean to me' card. At some point you have to accept that it's your inability to communicate clearly that's at fault here. I certainly can't give you the benefit of the doubt when it seems like this is a game you're playing, and I'd recommend anyone else reading your posts wherein you fail to make a clear statement do the same.
You know what is contradictory? Your claim that you're not actually saying these things along with the claim that you provided your source. From my vantage this seems like ad-hoc bullshittery - the sort of thing that you see on a TV series that went 3 season's longer than the creator's original storyline.
Jason Harvestdancer
Contributor
That particular article supports the fifth point, which is what I was asked to find a source for. Is this your passive-aggressive way of asking me to find a source for point two?
Two Of The people Arrested For The Alleged Kidnapping Scheme Appear To Be From The Left
FBI charges six who it says plotted to kidnap Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, as seven more who wanted to ignite civil war face state charges
Alleged Whitmer kidnapping plotter posted anti-Trump video
Did you know about this amazing resource called Google?
Jason Harvestdancer
Contributor
I list the different versions of the story that exist out there. Jahryn claims that if I list them, that means I believe them. I point out that Jahryn is spouting the usual nonsense by pointing out that the different versions actually contradict each other. You say I'm claiming I contradict myself.
My post, if you had read it, said that when a news story like this comes out it is a good idea to wait a little because you will find many versions of the story coming out over the next few days. Then I list, as evidence, many versions of the story that came out over the next few days. That's pretty simple and supported my point.
I'm not "just asking questions", I made a point (let a story age a little) and supported a point (evidence of how the story keeps changing). Then Jahryn accused me of believing all the versions of the story at once, and you now say I support all the versions of the story at once. When I point out that is absurd, you claim that means I'm not stating my position. My position, let a story age a little, was made and supported. I stated my position, so you think it is ad-hoc Stanley Kubrick bullshittery.
I stated that it is a good idea to let a story age. I gave evidence that it is a good idea to let a story age. You failed to see that my point was that it is a good idea to let a story age. In my post I wrote "It is sometimes a good idea to let a story sit a bit before commenting. More details seem to come out that contradict earlier details." before I listed the various versions of the story that had come out. People reading my post from the top down would see my point.
Idiots would see one of the versions that are supporting evidence for my point and say "aha, you believe that one."
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2002
- Messages
- 38,930
- Location
- Frozen in Michigan
- Gender
- Old Fart
- Basic Beliefs
- Don't be a dick.
It's no one else's job to find your sources. And just because you fly an anarchist flag does not mean you are antifa.
Jason Harvestdancer
Contributor
Ah, we have finally found a definitive authority on who is and isn't Antifa. You have to get your membership card from Zipr.
I'm going to stop you here. You didn't actually simply enumerate the argument that were made in this thread (I know, I just reviewed the entire thing). Just because you ascribe the origin elsewhere, you're the one introducing these different versions.
T.H.E.Y. said:
The charitable interpretation, then, is to see them as strawmen you're trying to introduce to bolster the fifth claim - that is the one you're making-but-not-making but is not supported by any evidence and only hangs on the unsubstantiated claim of the defense.
The miserly interpretation is that you're flooding the zone with shit.
Is your thesis that we should be waiting rather than talking about it because there will be many versions coming out over the next few days? You understand the point of the forum, correct? It's so people can make posts where they share ideas and information, possibly about things that are unfolding over time in real time. Not only are you subverting your own point by engaging in the discussion, that is by not waiting, you're also trying to tell people not to do exactly what we're all here to do. Indeed that's the entire purpose of this place.
It seems like you've introduced unsubstantiated nonsense, tried to make the point that we don't yet have all the information, exhorted everyone to stop talking, and then said that you don't know whether anything is true because there are multiple possible narratives. That's about right, right?
Jarhyn
Wizard
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2010
- Messages
- 14,687
- Gender
- Androgyne; they/them
- Basic Beliefs
- Natural Philosophy, Game Theoretic Ethicist
Last I knew Anarchists were the purest form of libertarianism. No government but their own. They just want to be Atlas in the corporate world where might makes right! KING OF THE WASTELAND!!!!!111one one one.
How about you talk about Whitmore now that we have that out of our systems. What do you think about the fact that Trump is currently encouraging this behavior? That they attempted a false flag operation? That they attempted an extrajudicial killing of a democratically elected democrat. Why can't you seem to talk about that, hmm?
How about you talk about Whitmore now that we have that out of our systems. What do you think about the fact that Trump is currently encouraging this behavior? That they attempted a false flag operation? That they attempted an extrajudicial killing of a democratically elected democrat. Why can't you seem to talk about that, hmm?