Colorforms
Senator
Your history is a long one.Two sentences, two lies.
Your history is a long one.Two sentences, two lies.
Me condemning unwarranted violence by the leftYour history is a long one.
Yes, In neither case did you denounce violence. In fact, in your second example you excused the violence of the guy who got shot because "it was going to happen eventually" so in your mind he may has well have initiated the conflict.Me condemning unwarranted violence by the left
One grave many will want to piss on
Abimael Guzmán, aka Comrade Gonzalo, died yesterday. Guzmán, a former philosophy professor, was the founder and autocratic leader of the Communist Party of Peru-Shining Path. Under his direction, the party went beyond the standard Stalinist adaptations to middle-class centrism at the expense of...www.politicaljack.com
You condoning unwarranted violence by the right.
Black Lives Matter Banners OK, White Lives Matter Banners NOT OK
Sandman harassed a guy by smiling :) Wow, I knew leftists were children, but wow. Rittenhouse was attacked and he shot back. I don't know how that could have been that hard for you. 1. By “smiling” at the vicious race-based mockery. 2. Rittenhouse was “attacked” by having an empty plastic bag...www.politicaljack.com
Any questions?
“ … the violence of the guy who got shot …”Yes, In neither case did you denounce violence. In fact, in your second example you excused the violence of the guy who got shot because "it was going to happen eventually" so in your mind he may has well have initiated the conflict.
No, you have ever denounced violence unless it was someone you were opposed to doing it.
It does. You defend the violence of the guy who initiated it, and denounced the guy defending himself against it.“ … the violence of the guy who got shot …”
Doesn’t that just say it all?
Just the opposite, of course. The guy who went there with a gun is the guy initiating violence, and the guy who improvised a weapon to defend himself with because he went there unarmed (not looking for trouble) was his victim.It does. You defend the violence of the guy who initiated it, and denounced the guy defending himself against it.
True to your form.
Several videos, a jury of peers, and I, call you a liar.Just the opposite, of course. The guy who went there with a gun is the guy initiating violence, and the guy who improvised a weapon to defend himself with because he went there unarmed (not looking for trouble) was his victim.
I haven’t seen any such videos. Any prosecutor can throw a case, that means nothing.Several videos, a jury of peers, and I, call you a liar.
Although I would imagine you're used to that by now.
Then you ignored the ones I linked to you. Doesn't surprise me. They are online. I'm not going to waste my time anymore.I haven’t seen any such videos. Any prosecutor can throw a case, that means nothing.