jakee

Iran: Weeks away from a functioning warhead since 1995.

But you literally have lied about the circumstances of Floyd’s death. This is undeniable. Right, so why would you have thought that? I never said anything to suggest that, so is there any reason why you’d think that’s what I want, except that it is what you want to happen to convicts? Let’s check, you’ve said you want violent murderers to be executed, you’ve said you don’t want prison to be made easier, you’ve said you don’t want a cent to be spent on prison reform… so this is how you want convicts to live. You want prison to be a dangerous and unpleasant place and you’re totally happy with the idea that convicts will be shanked by other convicts. Now here’s the thing - Derek Chauvin is a convict. You may think he’s wrongly convicted, but they’re is not a second, special prison system for the wrongly convicted. They’re all just convicts. So you cannot escape the fact that how you want the prison system to treat guilty people - you know, the real scumbags who deserve whatever they get - that is exactly the same as how you want the prison system to treat innocent people who got a bad deal in court. You cannot kid yourself into thinking you can have it any other way.

Except, yet again, that's a blatant lie. You said you have no problem whatsoever with innocent prisoners being collateral damage in your lust for brutal justice. I don't think Chauvin should have to deal with being shanked in prison even though he's guilty. You think people like Chauvin should endure prison shankings even if they're innocent. You literally said it wouldn't even bother you if they killed him. I think reform doesn't have to cost a dime for most, for the violent murderers ...I'm a death penalty advocate, I'm An eye for an eye kind of guy and I understand that will leave some blind.

So you were completely wrong to make a blanket statement about ‘the left’? You acknowledge that you made a mistake and you retract everything you’ve said about it?

Yes, you've been making a point about bigotry, while displaying the same bigotry, and while saying that everyone else should stop talking about bigotry. It's a confusing message.

And yet it’s ok that you’re currently being bigoted against approximately half the population?

And you in this thread have chosen to be bigoted against a group because of their general political beliefs.

You said it should be whitewashed. You said it would help if everyone stopped looking for it and stopped pointing it out when they found it. Why are the rules only different when it’s your pet cause?

So you’d never make a sweeping statement like, oh I don’t know, “‘the left’ thinks it’s ok to hate Christians” because that would itself be a display of bigotry? Because it obviously would be, wouldn’t it?

Why are you taking about it? You said the solution to bigotry is to stop talking about bigotry. Why are you actively perpetuating anti-Christian bigotry? Unless you maybe think racism is a much simpler and less important problem, so the rules are different for them than they are for you.

Someone else you probably know recently said that the way to end anti-Christian hate is to stop talking about it. Since you obviously feel so strongly about the issue it’s odd that you’re choosing to harp on about it and be part of the problem when you could instead just shut up, ignore it and be part of the solution.

Hate? Really? As someone you probably know recently said, if you look at the world through a lens... But hey, maybe you're right. Maybe all the anti-black racism is just imaginary but the vicious bigotry against the poor oppressed christian majority is real. Y'know, maybe.

I say, again, that the dangerous state of prisons is something you approve of and don’t want to change (except maybe to make it worse so there’s even more ‘justice’ to go around). Ironically, you think Chauvin should be shanked in prison even though he shouldn’t be there, I think he shouldn’t be shanked even though he should be there.

But of course Iran have been weeks away from building a nucear bomb since what, 1993? Time sure does move slow over there. But it's interesting that The Bomb was the one and only justification for attacking Iran, and Trump claims this strike has completely destroyed Irans entire nuclear programme. So he's definitely not going to strike them again, right?

Right - Trump's entire foreign policy platform, which his cheerleaders have not shut up about until literally today, is that he's totally different from all those warmongering presidents who have come before. So if you try very hard, you might just be able to figure out why saying Trump is the same as Obama when it comes to bombing foreign countries is actually making my point for me.