Toronto mass killer part of terrorist organization...of losers who can't get laid

[psiberzerker]

Prove me wrong. I've only been asking you to say something about incels, or mass murderers for days. You don't have an argument other than I'm wrong by default, do you?

[edit]Okay, that's 20 minutes. Funny how whenever I ask you for any opinion, rational or emotional on this topic, other than I'm wrong, you can't seem to think of one.

Come back when you do. I'll still be here...[/e]

 

[BotanyBoy]

No. The emotion behind the argument has nothing to do with the truth behind it.

EXACTLY!!!!

And the more emotion behind it the poorer the argument almost ALWAYS is.

Ask any defense lawyer or collegiate debater....Emotion is the enemy, because arguing objectively based upon the facts is CRITICAL in effective argumentation.

Also, you just said that an argument isn't an argument, if it's emotional.

No I didn't.

Now it's the more emotional the argument? This is yet another way to invalidate me, and women incientally.

No it's not, that's just your ascription so you can play a victim.

I've seen Vulcan ice queens go out and tear mother fuckers to shreds from courtrooms to TED talks.

It's an incel tactic. They use it to invalidate feminists all the time.

Most feminist invalidate themselves....most of the feminists who don't have been shunned by the "progressive feminist" groups/prominent figures the same way Kanye West is now an old white guy and Nazi.

Now, if you're not defending incels, say something about them. Other than I'm wrong for talking about them. That wasn't the question.

I'm not defending incels because it's a fact that I'm not...I've in no way defended them and have already condemned them.

If you think I am defending incels I challenge you to provide evidence and quote me doing so.

Right....

I never said you were wrong for talking about them....I said you were wrong for conflating a misogyny with conservatism, because you are.

Prove me wrong.

I already did, on numerous fronts.

I've only been asking you to say something about incels, or mass murderers for days.

I already have, that doesn't make your trying to use the terms misogynist and conservative interchangeably correct. They are not the same thing, no matter how much you want to deflect, ascribe, play victim and bullshit about it. They will never be the same thing, words mean things, that's why we have them and conservative =/= misogynist.

You don't have an argument other than I'm wrong by default, do you?

Not by default, by matter of fact.

Misogyny =/= conservatism.

 

[psiberzerker]

Misogyny =/= conservatism.

I never said it was. I called incels conservative for their misogynistic views, and terrorist tactics. Now, if you're done, captain semantic, can we go back to talking about incels, misogyny, conservatives, and terror attacks, or you want to check my speling next? We've wasted half the thread on you "Not derailing" now.

Page 3. You denounced me as a "Criminal," and have been denouncing me ever since. I don't get to have a point, because if I do, I've got my shadow right there to "Well actually," and change all my points into contradictions.

Dispassionately, BTW. This "UR Wrong," is not motivated by any emotion, whatsoever, it's just nitpicking every post to prove your conclusion, I'm wrong. You're a "Liberal" who defines Incels as what, exactly? That's the question I started this defending my right to speak in your high minister of semantics of Vulcan intellectual presences, so that was my last point:

If Incells aren't conservative, WTF are they? Make a point, 1 point, I dare you. That's the question at hand.

 

[IrezumiKiss]

or you want to check my speling next?

https://media.giphy.com/media/CcUk4a6fkgUfu/giphy.gif

 

[BotanyBoy]

I never said it was.

*goes on to IMMEDIATELY repeat that it was and doubles down by adding terrorism to the list* LOL

I called incels conservative for their misogynistic views, and terrorist tactics.

AGAIN

Conservatism =/= misogyny nor terrorism

Now, if you're done, captain semantic, can we go back to talking about incels, misogyny, conservatives, and terror attacks, or you want to check my speling next? We've wasted half the thread on you "Not derailing" now.

Sure, as soon as you demonstrate that you understand what the words in bold mean then we can have a conversation about them.

Now can you explain how incels are conservatives?

Because for the umpteenth time, misogyny and terrorism don't have shit to do with conservatism.

 

[psiberzerker]

*goes on to IMMEDIATELY repeat that it was and doubles down by adding terrorism to the list*

Because the topic is Terrorists. Look at the top of the page. It says it right there.

Now can you explain how incels are conservatives?

Yes, I can, again. They are violently opposed to progress, and civil rights.

 

[juttjaw]

Wrong Again!

 

[psiberzerker]

Wrong Again!

Then how aren't they violently opposed to progress, or civil rights?

 

[BotanyBoy]

Because the topic is Terrorists. Look at the top of the page. It says it right there.

That doesn't make conservatism =/= terrorism or misogyny.

Yes, I can, again.

Well??

They are violently opposed to progress, and civil rights.

"progress" is subjective..that's why I always throw it in quotes so we're back to just being terrorist.

And anti-civil rights.

Incels yes.

But that's not what conservatism is about.

"Progressives" are also opposed to civil rights, does that make incels "progressive"??

Hardly.

What about incels makes them conservative?

 

[psiberzerker]

And anti-civil rights.

Incels yes.

But that's not what conservatism is about.

Then what is it about?

"Progressives" are also opposed to civil rights, does that make incels "progressive"

Name 1.

 

[psiberzerker]

Liberal Terrorist Organizations. Again, FBI definition, are the Eco-terrorists, and Animal Rights Activists.

Bombing, Arson, Protests.

Not 1 murder. That's the difference. The real world difference, not the ideal one, Conservative terorists, even when claiming to protect life kill, remorselessly.

Liberal Terrorists only operate through Property Damage, and Emotional arguments. If you don't care, and you claim that you're right, because you don't care, then Murder isn't wrong, as long as you feel your cause is just.

I'm not wrong because I care. I care, because it's wrong.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Then what is it about?

Conservatism is a political and social philosophy promoting traditional social institutions in the context of culture and civilization. The central tenets of conservatism include tradition, human imperfection, organic society, hierarchy and authority and property rights.[1] Conservatives seek to preserve a range of institutions such as monarchy, religion, parliamentary government and property rights with the aim of emphasizing social stability and continuity[2] while the more extreme elements called reactionaries oppose modernism and seek a return to "the way things were"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservatism

Name 1.

Free speech.

Freedom of religion.

Freedom of association.

Armament.

The individual pursuit of happiness.

Equal rights under the law.

Not 1 murder. That's the difference. The real world difference

No it's not and that's a lie.....
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_shooting_of_Dallas_police_officers

There are plenty more left wing terrorist acts out there going back through recent history, especially when you go international where lefties are more prevalent. From the Soviet revolution all the way to S. America in the 90's right on through to the present. Last century alone you're talking a QUARTER OF A BILLION PEOPLE killed in the name of "progress" and "equality" when you include all the folks "progressive" egalitarian leftist starved to death via economic oppression.

Liberal Terrorists only operate through Property Damage, and Emotional arguments.

Liberals don't do terrorism....we just declare war and start killing "progressive" leftist scum. And our arguments tend to be cold, to the point and factual...sending the emotional basket case leftist to the fucking moon when their appeals to emotion bounce off our hater shields.

You're once again confusing progressivism/socialism/social justice...the left wing, with liberalism, which is right wing.

If you don't care, and you claim that you're right, because you don't care, then Murder isn't wrong, as long as you feel your cause is just.

I'm not wrong because I care. I care, because it's wrong.

Murder is never wrong as long as you feel your cause is just.....that's been every call to revolution, crusade and conquest since ever.

 

[ThatsTheGuy]

Odumba changed the definition of terrorism. Like, he wasn't allowing his community to say the word "terrorist". Like it's all about Muslims and patriots (not New England Patriots).

 

[ThatsTheGuy]

Now, if you're done, captain semantic,

If Incells aren't conservative, WTF are they? Make a point, 1 point, I dare you. That's the question at hand.

https://media.giphy.com/media/CcUk4a6fkgUfu/giphy.gif

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

I never said it was. I called incels conservative for their misogynistic views, and terrorist tactics. Now, if you're done, captain semantic, can we go back to talking about incels, misogyny, conservatives, and terror attacks, or you want to check my speling next? We've wasted half the thread on you "Not derailing" now.

Page 3. You denounced me as a "Criminal," and have been denouncing me ever since. I don't get to have a point, because if I do, I've got my shadow right there to "Well actually," and change all my points into contradictions.

Dispassionately, BTW. This "UR Wrong," is not motivated by any emotion, whatsoever, it's just nitpicking every post to prove your conclusion, I'm wrong. You're a "Liberal" who defines Incels as what, exactly? That's the question I started this defending my right to speak in your high minister of semantics of Vulcan intellectual presences, so that was my last point:

If Incells aren't conservative, WTF are they? Make a point, 1 point, I dare you. That's the question at hand.

Incels overwhelmingly exhibit traditional conservative beliefs. Their terrorist attacks are based on these traditionalist beliefs. And I believe you've met Buttanyboy, the dumbest Asian in the any given room he walks into...

 

[psiberzerker]

liberalism, which is right wing.

https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-wing

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/right wing

https://www.britannica.com/topic/right

"In the 20th century, a divergent radical form that was associated with Fascism."

And was killed in the next zebra crossing.

Free speech.

Freedom of religion.

Freedom of association.

Armament.

The individual pursuit of happiness.

These aren't civil rights. Also, it's not "Freedom of religion," it's "Congress shall make NO LAW respecting an institute of religion." The first amendment is about the separation of church, and state. At no point does it say "Freedom of religion." Anywhere. In the entire constitution. You forgot the rights to Life, and Liberty (Written by slavers.)

Equal rights under the law.

This is the goal of Civil Rights. Not the bill of rights, the right for Black people to walk down the streets without being shot. The right to fight terrorists, unarmed, without a gun, in a Waffle House. The right to sit 2 Minutes before you order, and the cops show up, even if you're both black. The right to have a plate of hash browns without being sexually assaulted by those sworn to protect, and Serve citisens, even if they black. The right to have the same protection under Congressional law as Christian Churches, the NRA, the Klan,and other special interest groups. (None of which are Taxed. The Clan get a tax break as a nonprofit.) The right to equal pay for equal work. These are Civil Rights.

Now, name 1 progressive who's against civil rights.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_shooting_of_Dallas_police_officers

They're police officers. They knew the risks when they chose their profession. (Still an Anarchist.)

Liberals don't do terrorism...we just declare war and start killing "progressive" leftist scum. And our arguments tend to be cold, to the point and factual...

A "Liberal" calling an anarchist a "Leftist" and war an unemotional argument. "I'LL KILL YOU! LEFTIST SCUM!!!"

A rational person can argue without threats of violence. A completely unemotional argument. Not something a terrorist would say. Not something a Conservative (Waves from Waco, grew up in NC) would say. A self declared rational leftist would say. Without emotion.

Murder is never wrong as long as you feel your cause is just.....that's been every call to revolution, crusade and conquest since ever.

It's not terrorism, if it's a revolution, crusade, or conquest? It's a just cause, the ends justify the means. This is your definition of "Liberal." Violently opposed to leftist scum. Without any emotion behind it.

Yeah, no. The clinical term for that is Psychopath. Anti-socialist. Conservative terrorist. Threatening to kill people for exercising free speech. The right to say "No" to sex.

That's why you're defending the Incels. They believe their cause is just, and have no remorse about Killing now. At least they're open, and honest about not being able to get laid.

 

[BotanyBoy]

https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-wing

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/right wing

https://www.britannica.com/topic/right

"In the 20th century, a divergent radical form that was associated with Fascism."

And was killed in the next zebra crossing.

Is this supposed to mean something??

I know what the right wing is....did you read any of your links??

These aren't civil rights.

Yes they are LOL

Also, it's not "Freedom of religion," it's "Congress shall make NO LAW respecting an institute of religion." The first amendment is about the separation of church, and state. At no point does it say "Freedom of religion." Anywhere. In the entire constitution. You forgot the rights to Life, and Liberty (Written by slavers.)

Yes it absolutely and undeniably does establish freedom of religion.....which is why you didn't post the full text, but no worries I got you covered!

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

https://media1.tenor.com/images/0f79ee1d4f7443727eded904e8fd2d53/tenor.gif?itemid=4653077

This is the goal of Civil Rights.

No, it is a civil right.

14th Amendment bubba.

Not the bill of rights, the right for Black people to walk down the streets without being shot.

Is already a right. Assault with a deadly weapon, attempted murder and murder are all 100% illegal in every state for people of every skin color, despite your misguided belief otherwise.

The right to fight terrorists, unarmed, without a gun, in a Waffle House. The right to sit 2 Minutes before you order, and the cops show up, even if you're both black. The right to have a plate of hash browns without being sexually assaulted by those sworn to protect, and Serve citisens, even if they black. The right to have the same protection under Congressional law as Christian Churches, the NRA, the Klan,and other special interest groups. (None of which are Taxed. The Clan get a tax break as a nonprofit.) The right to equal pay for equal work. These are Civil Rights.

Now, name 1 progressive who's against civil rights.

Pretty much the most incomprehensible word salad yet.

You already have equal protections under the law and equal pay.

None of which changes the fact that progressives are against numerous civil rights.

Like freedom of speech, association, religion, armament, equal rights under the law etc.

A "Liberal" calling an anarchist a "Leftist" and war an unemotional argument. "I'LL KILL YOU! LEFTIST SCUM!!!"

We've already established that you're a basic socialist/progressive in favor of the state and it's authority to pursue egalitarianism ("progress") and "the greater good" ....you're definitively not an anarchist.

Words mean things.

It's not terrorism, if it's a revolution, crusade, or conquest?

Depends on which side of the "terrorism" you're on and if you win or not.

That's why you're defending the Incels.

No I'm not defending incels, that's why you can't quote me defending incels anywhere.

You're just being intentionally dishonest at this point.

 

[psiberzerker]

I know what the right wing is....did you read any of your links?

Yes, and they all say Conservative. So, as a Right Wing Liberal, how do you rationalize conservatives using "Liberal" as an insult? How can you be a liberal conservative, or a right wing liberal, when they're in direct opposition (Conflict) in this country's political climate?

(Not saying they are diametric opposites, only that they Oppose Each Other.)

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

I did read the whole thing. It doesn't say "Freedom of religion." It says NO LAW about it. One way or another, keep Religion out of Congress, in no uncertain terms. "No." Period. No exceptions. Complete seperation of church, and state. Not "Freedom of Religion." You can't just cherry pick the word "Freedom" in there, and ignore the words NO LAW as if it doesn't say that first. None, zero, zip. Jesus can come to speak at the Senate hearing any time he wants, and so can Mohammed.

Assault with a deadly weapon, attempted murder and murder are all 100% illegal in every state for people of every skin color, despite your misguided belief otherwise.

Right, but Equal Protection Under those laws, means Enforcing them Equally. For all citizens. It doesn't matter what the law says if the cops don't arrest murderers, and give them time off until the heat dies down, because they're cops. The police are excercising an exclusive Privilege to enforce the laws, which don't apply to them. Just like the Congress are excercising Exclusive rights to state funde Healthcare while denying them to the people.

Civil Rights isn't the Bill of Rights you dingbat. It's the progressive fight, the "Liberal Agenda" of equal protection under the law.

Pretty much the most incomprehensible word salad yet.

You don't understand it, therefore it's "Word Salad." Rather than admit you don't understand it. by default, you're right, I'm wrong.

You already have equal protections under the law and equal pay.

I don't have a pot to piss in. No, I don't. Telling you that is a conservative assurance that your Privilege isn't real, therefore, Civil Rights is a "Liberal Agenda." I have the right to go to jail, and get gang raped for having to take a piss.

None of which changes the fact that progressives are against numerous civil rights.

Like freedom of speech, association, religion, armament, equal rights under the law etc.

Back that up, any of that, in any way shape, or form. Also, that wasn't the question, I said name 1 progressive who's "Against civil rights."

We've already established that you...

No, you assumed all of that, and continue grasping at straws to define me as an idiot you have intellectual superiority over. Like:

Words mean things.

Semantics. This is your core belief, when in actuality, words change, and have different meanings, in different context. However, if you get to chose the context, the meaning "We already established..."

We is plural. We has a meaning. I did not agree with you, so We established that I am everything that you decided before this thread even started to invalidate my right to voice my opinion.

So, I'm expected to join you in your fantasy world where "Right Wing Liberal" is a thing. Snowflake. Where The Bill of Rights=Civil Rights, and you don't have to support a single one of your points, on the grounds that I just don't understand words.

Depends on which side of the "terrorism" you're on and if you win or not.

No, it doesn't. Terrorism is using violence to sway populations by fear. It doesn't matter if you commit mass murder because Allah, Jesus, Helter Skelter, Racial superiority, or the dog next door told you to do it. Mass Murder is Wrong. Period. No exceptions. There's terrorists who kill, and terrorists who don't. The ends don't justify the means you deluded psycho.

No I'm not defending incels. That's why you can't quote me defending incels anywhere.

I don't have to. You're so busy keeping us busy, arguing what the definition of is is, they can do whatever they want. Including Mass Murder. Your ends justify the means philosophy, that the sociopathic defends every ends justify the means murderer out there. Women are weak, emotional, and withold their right to sex, and therefore deserve to die.

It's the same mindset, the dead can't argue, or say "No." The ultimate thread necrophilia. Tell the cops "She said yes, then slipped, and hit her head." He said/she's dead defense. Of Incels.

History is written by the victor, and in your mind, you've already won. You defend them by distracting the progressives from actively fighting them. In the real world, where there should be concequences for sedition, and conspiracy to committ mass murder. You defend them from being called "Conservative." Just like you claim to be a "Right wing liberal." You're not, you're a garden variety malignant narcissist, just like the other Incels.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Yes, and they all say Conservative. So, as a Right Wing Liberal, how do you rationalize conservatives using "Liberal" as an insult? How can you be a liberal conservative, or a right wing liberal, when they're in direct opposition (Conflict) in this country's political climate?

It's just more ignorance, just like the socialists who call themselves liberals....or anarchist for that matter LOL.

Right wing and liberalism are not in opposition or conflict.

Because conservatism is right wing, but right wing is not conservatism....it's hierarchical, as oppose to egalitarian, which is what the left wing is after.

Liberalism is individualistic and highly capitalistic in all it's forms...both of which lend themselves to natural hierarchy, which liberalism is fine with.

I did read the whole thing. It doesn't say "Freedom of religion." It says NO LAW about it.

No law about = freedom

Civil Rights isn't the Bill of Rights you dingbat. It's the progressive fight, the "Liberal Agenda" of equal protection under the law.

In the USA it does codify them into law though....so yes it is.

No that was the "civil rights movement".....separate from your actual defined civil rights.

We is plural. We has a meaning. I did not agree with you,

I thought you agreed that anarchism is what all the reference materials (dictionaries, encyclopedias etc.) all say it is.

I guess not.

So you're claiming that government control/ownership over the means of production (wealth redistribution, public services, "for the greater good", socialism) is anarchism then?

Right?

So, I'm expected to join you in your fantasy world where "Right Wing Liberal" is a thing. Snowflake. Where The Bill of Rights=Civil Rights,

That's not a fantasy world, that's the real world.

I don't have to

You CAN'T, that's why you went on to generate more lies and ascription.

You defend them by distracting the progressives from actively fighting them. '

LOL that ^^ is some weak sauce right there.

you're a garden variety malignant narcissist, just like the other Incels.

Oh now you're claiming that I am an incel directly!!

https://media.tenor.com/images/f7354b8c66dcf774a0cd75d1806e0d56/tenor.gif

You mad bro???

Tell us more how the 1st Amendment doesn't protect the individuals freedom of religion and all the SCOTUS cases out there are wrong because YOU sayz so!
https://media.giphy.com/media/EysAMIOt4GOmk/giphy.gif

 

[psiberzerker]

So, you're claiming...

No, I'm claiming that you don't have an argument that doesn't speak for me. So that you have something you actually understand well enough to argue with, or is purely semantic.

WE didn't agree anything.

I know what I'm saying. I'm saying mass murder is wrong. Period. I'm saying that anyone who's argument is you're too stupid for this discussion, that claim special intellectual rights, and that caring about an issue makes you wrong about it is antisocial.

So does the FBI, so does the Psychiatric community.

That the right to Life makes murder wrong. Killing for the right to life is wrong, and makes you wrong if you can't see that intrinsic contradiction.

That terrorism is terrorism. It doesn't depend on anything, except for claiming the high ground over my dead body.

That violence isn't a right, and doesn't make you right. Just killers. Whatever you want to tell yourself.

That right wing liberals are self deluded snowflakes. That you're a statist, and there's no hope for you, because you like it too much.

 

[BotanyBoy]

*edited for relevancy*

No,

WE didn't agree anything.

Ok...so what definition of anarchist are you using?


The one agreed upon by the overwhelming majority of the population is:

Definition of anarchism
1 : a political theory holding all forms of governmental authority to be unnecessary and undesirable and advocating a society based on voluntary cooperation and free association of individuals and groups
2 : the advocacy or practice of anarchistic principles

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/anarchism

 

[psiberzerker]

The one agreed upon by the overwhelming majority of...

Statists. The definition of anarchism agreed apon, democratically by a committee of statists.

You don't see the inherent contradiction there?

No, of course not. You're a "Right wing liberal." I'm supposed to bow to your will. Like a good anarchist.

Dumbass.

 

[BotanyBoy]

That terrorism is terrorism. It doesn't depend on anything, .

Yes it does.

One mans terrorist is another mans patriot.

George Washington was a TERRORIST, a liberal terrorist but still.

The only reason the USA remembers him as a patriot is because he won.

That violence isn't a right, and doesn't make you right. Just killers. Whatever you want to tell yourself.

Didn't say it was or did. You're just making random shit up again.

That right wing liberals are self deluded snowflakes.

You have liberals (they are all right wing) confused with progressives.

That you're a statist, and there's no hope for you, because you like it too much.

Clearly...not being an anarchist but a liberal I'm a sort of statist, very good.

Hope for me how?

Like what too much?

 

[BotanyBoy]

Statists. The definition of anarchism agreed apon, democratically by a committee of statists.

You don't see the inherent contradiction there?

No, of course not. You're a "Right wing liberal." I'm supposed to bow to your will. Like a good anarchist.

Dumbass.

Academics, not statist.

No I don't see the inherent contradiction in coming to an agreed upon meaning for a word, it's the fundamental basis for all communication.

Bow to my will?? LOL what a lunatic...you're on a real "let's make shit up!~" spree.


So what definition of anarchism are you using?

Or are you just going to name call like the other 3rd graders who can't answer simple questions

 

[psiberzerker]

Oh now you're claiming that I am an incel directly!!

No, I've been doing that for days now. You just realized it.