<snip>
Okay so logically we need to explore the possibility the maybe the FBI is battling to contain such problems in US. Certainly the fact that they questioned Mateen twice and also that they have 900 active US based investigations supports this.....logically.
<snip>
You support Trump and Trump advocates banning *all* Muslims at the border, a view that is bigoted to say the least. Ergo, you are a bigot. You can't support a bigot's bigoted views without being a bigot yourself.
You have yet to give any kind of indication of how this would help anything. I'm waiting but not holding my breath.
"A disease like Ebola" is splitting hairs, which you know perfectly well. I very much doubt anyone who reads that particular post will miss your intent. Because you also advocate banning Muslims at the borders until the FBI figures it out, it follows that it's the kind of disease control you suggest in your piss-poor hypothetical.
You really need to stay away from the hypotheticals. They make you look stupid. Not that it's not true but you might want to avoid making it so obvious.
Oh, and from the above it also follows what and whom you blame. You're not saying it out loud because that would be so obviously bigoted that even you couldn't weasel your way out of it but considering what you support and why, and adding the Ebola hypothetical, well...
And Trump's *initial* position was this:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/donald-trump-responds-to-criticism-over-banning-muslims-from-us-i-dont-care-a6764291.html
No, you silly fucker.
You support Trump and Trump advocates banning *all* Muslims at the border, a view that is bigoted to say the least. Ergo, you are a bigot. You can't support a bigot's bigoted views without being a bigot yourself.
Are you trying to tell me what I believe?
No it is OBVIOUSLY a bit of a problem when I have never said that I support banning all Muslims at the border. It is more of a problem when I have stated exactly what I was supporting in principle. Especially when what you WANT me to support, I don't and will not endorse for your benefit.
Now there is about two options, either I have had it wrong all along and Donald trump never had that position, in which case the position you want me to support is different to any position I have apparently wrongly attributed to him (in which case I have not endorsed the position of banning all Muslims at the borders) OR I am right and it is a previous position he has had (in which case I have not endorsed the position of banning all Muslims at the borders).
There is no third option. The "you may have been ignorant in what I meant" option has left the station.
So which was it of those two options? Well as listed above the result doesn't matter. It still doesn't have me backing the position you WANT me to back. "You support Trump and Trump advocates banning *all* Muslims at the border"
So as YOU made that claim, YOU get to back that claim.
As whether I misunderstood or misheard what Trump said, its a possibility. Maybe instead of relying on media. Maybe it is best understanding that I know what I think or believe is what I think or believe and trying to tell me what I believe based on fuck all is fucking idiotic.
Then again maybe instead of asking a UK media publication asking his National Media Spokesperson,
may be a better idea (She mentions the stance at that time from 1:58 - 2:48)
So listening to her and seeing what I had been agreeing in principle with sounds closer to exactly what I fucking said and nothing like what YOU fucking said I supported.
Interesting, huh? Kind of like you are completely full of shit, huh?
"B....b....b....but a UK paper said..."
And Trump's *initial* position was this:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/donald-trump-responds-to-criticism-over-banning-muslims-from-us-i-dont-care-a6764291.html
There is a reason they write something untrue about Trump and most rational people understand that the media is not exactly doing Trump favours. In fact the Press is actively trying to make Hillary look as close to human as they can make her and Trump look like the devil.
Tell him ex-Democrat political strategist, Pat Candell
http://www.breitbart.com/radio/2016/08/01/pat-caddell-on-cooked-reuters-poll-never-in-my-life-have-i-seen-a-news-organization-do-something-so-dishonest/So what else?
You support Trump and Trump advocates.....
How the hell can anyone even consider voting for Trump?
I am glad I am not in America. Who are in the running Socialist Sanders? No thanks. What about Hillary? Nope. She is at LEAST on par with....Trump. Trump is a moron.
So Marco Rubio? Ted Cruz? Ugh!
Trump is a blowhard, arrogant, boorish, entitled, opinionated, idiot who gambles with his and other people's money and is happy to risk a company or personal bankrupt, he is VERY unsuited to being a President.
HOWEVER
Hilary is worse
Liar.
Criminal
Corrupt
Personal emails for state business?
Trump is awful. Hilary is evil.
I support Trump? Interesting point of view.
Next!
You can't support a bigot's bigoted views without being a bigot yourself
No shit! Have you made a point? No you haven't. Why not? You have not identified any bigoted point of view that I ACTUALLY hold and tell me why it IS bigoted. You have not identified who I am bigoted towards and where I have said bigoted things to them. I CAN hold any position with any bigot IF it is NOT bigoted and not be a bigot.
If I share a love of painting like Adolf Hitler did and NOT be a bigot. I could even agree with his determination on the merits of different artist styles. That won't make me a bigot.
You have yet to give any kind of indication of how this would help anything. I'm waiting but not holding my breath.
Why would I need to point this out. I agree with the idea in principle. Its not my idea. It would be up to the originator and his cronies to develop it into a fully developed strategic plan and then I will review it and see whether I think it will work or whether it is better or worse than the simple idea that I DID agree in principle with.
You are asking the wrong question from the wrong person. I told you this many times already, and as I said, you cannot feign ignorance any more. That train has left the station. You are either dishonest or stupid.
"A disease like Ebola" is splitting hairs, which you know perfectly well. I very much doubt anyone who reads that particular post will miss your intent. Because you also advocate banning Muslims at the borders until the FBI figures it out, it follows that it's the kind of disease control you suggest in your piss-poor hypothetical.
Repeating a lie is not making it any more true. Because "I advocate Banning Muslims at the border" OR do I support in principle the idea of placing a temporary freeze on Muslim immigration to US"? Two different positions. One I have supported in principle and the other I have not. More bait and switch, huh? What exactly is the "kind of disease control"? Be specific.
I have made very clear in this analogy (and we KNOW that analogies are not comparable in every conceivable way but rather, in a specific and narrow sense. An analogy does NOT say "x is like y in every way" or "x is y" it says "x is like y in z way". Trying to find other ways apart from z to show x is not like y at all is disingenuous and comes either from a position of stupidity or dishonesty) that the threat of the Ebola like disease in this analogy is LIKE the the threat of the radical Muslim extremist ideology. I have not said it is like Ebola nor have I compared Muslims to Ebola and only an idiot would think so.
I do not need to avoid hypotheticals. My hypotheticals are fine.
Oh, and from the above it also follows what and whom you blame. You're not saying it out loud because that would be so obviously bigoted that even you couldn't weasel your way out of it but considering what you support and why, and adding the Ebola hypothetical, well...
Its pretty fucking clear from everything I have posted, who I blame. Radical Muslim Extremists. I have posted this a lot. An awful lot. Would you like me to pull quotes of how many times I have blamed them? Of course it is fucking clear.
I know that does not work with your narrative and you would prefer for me to blame someone else, for me to be the bigot you desperately want to promote me as.
Here is your chance - BACK YOURSELF - show where I have been bigoted to any group. class, race or gender. No more evading. Back yourself. No "Well I read this in this disingenuous way so as to infer the opposite to what you have said..."
No, you made the claim. It was a big claim. You doubled down. You have lied consistently and tried to bait and switch in order to replace positions I hold with other positions I do not hold, in order to defend positions you feel are stronger.
Enough bullshit. Back yourself Odeon. For once. You called me a bigot, back yourself......or admit the lie.