LogFAQs > #962077920

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, DB2, DB3, DB4, DB5, DB6, DB7, DB8, Database 9 ( 09.28.2021-02-17-2022 ), DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	9 y/o Sobs UNCONTROLLABLY as she and 6 ANTI-VAXXERS are ARRESTED!!!
LinkPizza 01/25/22 8:58:11 PM #58:	SKARDAVNELNATE posted... You said you were going to say it clearly so I'll understand. Since you were being so clear I assumed that was exactly what you meant. No. You were acting like a child pretending to think I was talking about people not protesting when it was obvious to anyone who knows how to have a conversation that I was talking about non-peaceful protesters... Since our conversation was about protesters... SKARDAVNELNATE posted... That's how it was presented through news coverage. If it's not accurate then don't blame the public for being misinformed. Blame the news media for misinforming the public. That is not how it was presented in news coverage. But everyone in this conversation probably understands that you might have trouble understanding that. You can barely follow a conversation. So, it might be hard to understand that the news never made it seem like criminals should get away just because they are protesters. Unless you're watching some weird news that I've never seen... It's also possibly you didn't understand what they were saying. Or understand any context they gave with it... SKARDAVNELNATE posted... Why is anyone talking about arresting the peaceful protesters? No one is. What I'm saying it you said to not arrest any protesters if the majority is peaceful. He's saying to only arrest the non-peaceful protesters. I'm saying what you're saying is false, and what he's saying is correct. If you really don't understand common sense, that's a you problem... SKARDAVNELNATE posted... What was implied? As far as I can tell I said one thing and adgl said something contradictory to it. But I don't see an understanding on his part of what lead me to the conclusion I've reached, nor do I see any arguments to dissuade me from my statement. That is why I say he didn't address what he quoted. You really have that much trouble reading the part you replied to? I said, "You would still arrest the non-peaceful protesters..." You said, "Again, this is where we disagree and what was not addressed in the post." And I said, "It was heavily implied, though." So, I'm probably saying that the part you said wasn't addressed in the post was implied. And that part would be the part about arresting the non-peaceful protesters. Unless you were talking about something different... He implied to arrest non-peaceful protesters when he said, "So long as they're mostly peaceful, there are no grounds for arresting most of the people present. Therein we arrive at one of the major challenges in arresting troublemakers in large protests: finding them." He was saying how finding them to arrest them was hard. This seems to imply that he thinks they should be arrested. But gave a reason as to why it's hard to... Which he goes on to explain in future posts... --- Official King of Kings Switch FC: 7216-4417-4511 Add Me because I'll probably add you. I'm probably the LinkPizza you'll see around. <cite>LinkPizza posted [p:962077920] in 9 y/o Sobs... [t:79865413]...</cite> <quote>SKARDAVNELNATE posted...</cite> <quote>You said you were going to say it clearly so I'll understand. Since you were being so clear I assumed that was exactly what you meant.</quote> No. You were acting like a child pretending to think I was talking about people not protesting when it was obvious to anyone who knows how to have a conversation that I was talking about non-peaceful protesters... Since our conversation was about protesters... SKARDAVNELNATE posted...</cite> <quote>That's how it was presented through news coverage. If it's not accurate then don't blame the public for being misinformed. Blame the news media for misinforming the public.</quote> That is not how it was presented in news coverage. But everyone in this conversation probably understands that you might have trouble understanding that. You can barely follow a conversation. So, it might be hard to understand that the news never made it seem like criminals should get away just because they are protesters. Unless you're watching some weird news that I've never seen... It's also possibly you didn't understand what they were saying. Or understand any context they gave with it... SKARDAVNELNATE posted...</cite> <quote>Why is anyone talking about arresting the peaceful protesters?</quote> No one is. What I'm saying it you said to not arrest any protesters if the majority is peaceful. He's saying to only arrest the non-peaceful protesters. I'm saying what you're saying is false, and what he's saying is correct. If you really don't understand common sense, that's a you problem... SKARDAVNELNATE posted...</cite> <quote>What was implied? As far as I can tell I said one thing and adgl said something contradictory to it. But I don't see an understanding on his part of what lead me to the conclusion I've reached, nor do I see any arguments to dissuade me from my statement. That is why I say he didn't address what he quoted.</quote> You really have that much trouble reading the part you replied to? I said, "You would still arrest the non-peaceful protesters..." You said, "Again, this is where we disagree and what was not addressed in the post." And I said, "It was heavily implied, though." So, I'm probably saying that the part you said wasn't addressed in the post was implied. And that part would be the part about arresting the non-peaceful protesters. Unless you were talking about something different... He implied to arrest non-peaceful protesters when he said, "So long as they're mostly peaceful, there are no grounds for arresting most of the people present. Therein we arrive at one of the major challenges in arresting troublemakers in large protests: finding them." He was saying how finding them to arrest them was hard. This seems to imply that he thinks they should be arrested. But gave a reason as to why it's hard to... Which he goes on to explain in future posts... --- Official King of Kings Switch FC: 7216-4417-4511 Add Me because I'll probably add you. I'm probably the LinkPizza you'll see around.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1