What are the percentages on false vs real substantiated claims of violence coming from the lib/TDS crowd?
Nah, I was asking about those that so often make this stuff up. You know, the Russia, Russia, Russia sort of crowd?
Those that make the false claims, the native American/black Isrealites crew, those that claim racial slurs with no confirmation, possibly this Smullet dude?
What are the percentages of real vs false claims of violence from the lib/TDS crowd? How many are made up vs how many substantiated?
I don't know if it's accurate or not. The comment was originally a tongue in cheek response to the question as to whether there was any Trump supporters who didn't think attacking someone for their views is wrong. I just went with the easy response, despite you and I both knowing there are plenty of people, Trump supporters included, that think such is justified.
You may "know" that. I do not. I do believe that CPD should get the Intelligence unit and Hank Voight on the case to sort it all out. Don't you?
Nah, I was asking about those that so often make this stuff up. You know, the Russia, Russia, Russia sort of crowd?
Those that make the false claims, the native American/black Isrealites crew, those that claim racial slurs with no confirmation, possibly this Smullet dude?
What are the percentages of real vs false claims of violence from the lib/TDS crowd? How many are made up vs how many substantiated?
Between the buzzfeed debacle and smirkgate your batting average has been pretty low lately.
Suggestion: I would question where you are getting your [STRIKE]news[/STRIKE] opinion input from.
This is what people sound like when they’re trying to justify the side they’ve already taken. He hasn’t put his ideas through the “am I full of ****?” test. For one thing, he’s saying two way communication is the only way to determine when a living thing is sentient. He’s also saying that sentience is the proper way to determine when it’s murder to kill a living thing, and when it’s not. In both areas, he seems to be full of ****.[video=youtube_share;7fGU5R2qBDc]https://youtu.be/7fGU5R2qBDc[/video]
I would say what he’s talking about is the events the mainstream media decides are issues of racial predudice but turn out to be, either hoaxes, or a complete misinterpretation by the left and the media. Turns out Travon Martin wasn’t profiled, he was a thug. Hands up don’t shoot didn’t happen. Miss “I don’t know how they could have such hatred in they heart” was a scammer trying to make her gofundme fortune. The list goes on. Of course there are some instances of legitimate racist violence. And there are plenty of examples of “hate hoaxes” too. But as you say, it’s hard to say which number is higher. Hoaxes vs real. I’d like to see a legitimate study done.I am unaware of any scholarly study concerning such, so I imagine it is as frequent, or rare, as one's pre-conditioned biases allow them to believe.
[video=youtube_share;7fGU5R2qBDc]https://youtu.be/7fGU5R2qBDc[/video]
Surprised I haven't seen this on INGO, but I may have missed it.
I wonder how many antifa read Unintended Consequences.
Heck, I kinda wonder how mant INGOers have.
I'm waiting for the movie to come out.