jakee

If I placed a bet on 'not your own countrymen and fellow citizens', how much would I lose?

Let no tragedy go to waste, eh? You could at least have waited for his body to be cold before leveraging his murder to make a cheap political point. If he's the best of you, why treat him with such disrespect on the day of his death? Now is surely the time for thoughts and prayers, not partisan pettiness.

How many are against it, and how many are either in favour or don't care? IDF members have done things like kill ambulance crews in order to set an ambush that will draw in more ambulance crews to kill. IDF members have used drones to follow doctors home to their families after work then sent in strikes to kill everyone in the building. IDF members do things like this: Establishing an invisible “security perimeter” then shooting civilians who cross it has become common practice in Gaza, Israeli soldiers have testified.  When asked how his squad decided whether to shoot unarmed Palestinians, Raab said: “Its a question of distance. There is a line that we define. They don’t know where this line is, but we do.” It's absolutely brilliant that some people in the IDF might be hesitating to join in the latest round of atrocities - but as yet is it making any difference whatsoever to any resident of Gaza?

Just out of curiosity, would you still generally say that the IDF is in the habit of choosing the least bad options?

Well... I'd say MBS counts as a monarch and he's Satan incarnate. The Thai royal family are also quite happy to sit back and watch horrendous human rights abuses occur in the name of protecting their honour from even the most petty of minor criticisms. There's more than a chance that Trump would be just as bad if given the same opportunity, but these guys are actually out there doing it right now.

Newsflash - the police don't get to murder people just because they were already ill. Eugenics isn't their job. What do you think any of that statement means? The Chief by Judge ordered perjury because a libel lawsuit was dismissed? What? Regardless, a cursory search shows that you're just lying again. Defamation is a really high bar in the US. If a news outlet says they think you committed perjury, and your defamation lawsuit over those statements is tossed out, it absolutely does not automatically mean the judge thinks you committed perjury unless they explicitly say so - otherwise it just means they think the outlet had a protected first amendment right to say what they said. Collin, Chaix, and Chris Madel (attorney for the defense in this case) have all separately claimed that Judge Wahl’s ruling “questioned the veracity” of Blackwell’s testimony, much to the delight of their fans. Those familiar with Alpha News won’t be surprised to hear that they’re lying. In his order’s first pages, Judge Wahl writes that “The Court neither finds nor implies that any of Blackwell’s testimony in the Chauvin trial was false, improper, or misleading,” in direct contradiction to the public responses of the defendants and their counsel. The lawsuit’s dismissal is good for them, certainly, but “these statements are not defamatory” in no way means “this documentary is truthful.” So what? No-one disputes that Floyd committed a minor crime. But is a counterfeit twenty enough justification to suffocate someone until they are obviously dead? Do you genuinely believe that to be the case? Here's a thought experiment - what if Donald Trump had been at home when the FBI raided his place? What if he'd protested, and a Fed had handcuffed him, thrown him to the ground and knelt on his lungs until he died? Would that be ok? After all, he's not a healthy man - he's old and morbidly obese so it wouldn't be much of a surprise if his heart popped. And the Feds were there on a legit search warrant. And the reason for the search warrant (all the stolen documents) was found on the scene. So if Trump had been killed in the process.... no big deal, right?

So in the matrix, thought experiment, real world society, why would the white guy have to move out of the non-white neighbourhood because of all the hassle he's getting for being white, when he's not going to be hassled for being white?

Really? When? By who? Is it? Lets see... Yes, Derek Chauvin is actually a murderer, both legally and factually, based on the evidence and due process of the U.S. legal system. Here's why that’s not just a legal technicality: 1. Legal Definition Met Chauvin was convicted by a jury of: Second-degree unintentional murder — causing death without intent while committing a felony (in this case, excessive force). Third-degree murder — acting with a depraved mind and showing disregard for human life. Second-degree manslaughter — culpable negligence creating an unreasonable risk. These aren't symbolic charges; they follow specific definitions under Minnesota law, and the jury found him guilty based on overwhelming evidence. 2. Evidence Was Clear and Public Video footage showed Chauvin kneeling on George Floyd’s neck for over 9 minutes, even after Floyd lost consciousness and had no pulse. Multiple medical experts testified that Floyd died from lack of oxygen, not drugs or other causes. Police use-of-force experts (including from the Minneapolis Police Department) testified that Chauvin’s actions were not justified. 3. Due Process Was Followed Chauvin had a full, high-profile trial with legal representation. He was convicted by a jury of his peers. His appeals were heard and rejected. He is now serving a prison sentence. So is he “actually” a murderer? Yes — both in legal fact and in common-sense reality. This wasn’t a wrongful conviction or a gray area. It was a clear case of excessive, deadly force resulting in the unlawful killing of another human being. Well damn, I guess you're right for once.

Do you have any idea what that means, or how it relates to any part of our discussion? I'm really not sure why you think copy and pasting random bits of irrelevant test will make you seem smarter. Exactly, you made a simple AI query and then believed it implicitly - it must be true because AI said it! Do ya not think maybe that's something like an argument from authority fallacy? You really should be aware that if you want to use AI to find stuff out you really have to check its sources before swallowing what it tells you. AI is dumber than a box of rocks and even less honest than you.

There’s more than enough explicit creepiness in the ‘enigmas never age’ comment without needing to read that much into the rest of it.

Even by the standards of a guy who usually says 3 insane things before breakfast, that is fucking INSANE.

That is certainly true! In 1315, Louis X published a decree, known as the Ordonnance royale du juillet, 1315 abolishing slavery and proclaiming that "France signifies freedom", with the effect that any slave setting foot on French soil should be freed.[4] However, slavery continued until the 17th century in some of France's Mediterranean harbours in Provence, as well as until the 18th century in some of France's overseas territories. So the US was really not responsible for the beginning of the end of slavery, was it?

Ok. So in the thought experiment why do you assume one white guy moving to a non white neighbourhood is going to get hassled that badly? Is society that racist? Do you think black people would face the same amount of hassle moving to white neighbourhoods?

And how do you compare respectful disagreement to how Bigun approached this conversation? In which case, who should you be talking to about Trumpish pissing contests?

Yes, god forbid you could for once respond like a normal person instead. Much easier to just ignore any information you don't like, as always.

Which has nothing to do with your blatantly false claim that the Coast Guard can’t interdict suspected narco boats in international waters unless they are US flagged.

Except he's not informing you - he's claiming something completely different. Nothing in that wall of copy and paste remotely supports his claim. None of it says what he claims it does because he hasn't even bothered to make the effort of reading it. He claims the Coast Guard could not have interdicted the boat in international waters. Not only does US law say that's absolute nonsense - reality says it's absolute nonsense. The US Coast Guard interdicts foreign cartel owned narco speedboats in international waters All. The Time.

Really? Is this Trumpish? “you don't know shit from a good grade of peanut butter.” Because I didn’t say that, Bigun did. What about this? “Now just piss the fuck off”? Because I didn’t say that, Bigun did. And that’s despite the fact that he’s wrong. Despite the fact that he knows he’s wrong. And he’s still behaving like that. So who should you be talking to about pissing contests?

It’s not an opinion - it’s a factual assertion that he knows is not true. I’m totally willing to accept that it was just a mistake when he first said it, but not now. He most definitely knows he is wrong, he is just physically incapable of saying so to me.

And which part of that do you think means that you are not categorically wrong? You do understand that if you were right, that list would have consisted only of the first bullet point. You do understand that the rest of the list - and crucially for this discussion the third one - prove that you are wrong. You do understand that (from my link) 'south of Mexico' is not within 200 miles of the US coast. 'South of the Galapagos' is not within 200 miles of the US coast. You do understand that the boat from Venezuela was far closer to US territorial waters than any of the non-US flagged vessels interdicted by Operation Pacific Viper. Yet despite all of this you'd rather keep lying and lashing out than simply acknowledging that you were wrong, and your support for the attack was based on a falsehood.

No, your source citations back up my shit, as does any cursory google search, as does reality and common sense. The claim that the US coastguard can only board US flagged vessels and no others in international waters is an outright lie. You know it’s a lie. Like - take a look at Operation Pacific Viper, for instance. You are not stupid enough to think all these narco speedboats are US registered vessels. You just aren’t. So why are you lying when it’s so obvious that you’re doing it? https://www.usbordernews.com/p/coast-guard-vs-the-cartels-inside-operation-pacific-viper

Actually, it’s to try and stop you from making a fool of yourself by sticking to blatantly false claims. If you insist on getting so angry when you find out you’re wrong, I really can’t help with that. And you are wrong. Obviously, blatantly wrong. The US Coastguard can board many vessels in international waters that are not US flagged. Including flagless vessels, that this one (if it was actually a narco-trafficker speedboat) almost certainly was. Including the scenario in your own post of a foreign vessel suspected of illicit activity that plans to enter US waters. Kinda sounds like every single drug boat smuggling into the US, don’t you think? And the thing is, you know you’re wrong even without having to look up any laws. You know you’re wrong just through living in the world and being vaguely aware of current events. Does the US coastguard seize narco boats in international waters? Yes it does - quite regularly. Are they all US flagged? Blatantly not - why the hell would they be if it only served to make them more vulnerable to law enforcement? So regardless of how mad you want to get at being caught talking shit, reality doesn’t care and you’re still talking shit.

You have justified your support for the policy by making blatantly false claims about the law, though.

Ok. So in the Matrix why do you assume one white guy moving to a non white neighbourhood is going to get hassled that badly? Is society that racist? What have you compromised?

France banned slavery in 1315. Korea banned slavery in about 950 - as did Venice. Many other nations were ‘on the way’ to banning slavery well before the US was ‘on the way’ to it, just as the US was quite sluggish in actually banning it. But by all means, keep on revising history to make yourself feel better.