My favorite part is where they continue to argue with my banned ass, knowing full well I can’t respond. The only way to win for them, I suppose.

Edit: Looks like there was some confusion regarding cross-posting in the original link so I’ll just put the Modlog link here that displays the removed comment and ban, with the thread itself linked here. I’d rather add than change for the sake of the post’s integrity and preventing confusion.

  • LeninWeave [any]@lemmy.ml
    1911·
    6 days ago

    What would you think of someone who said there was no evidence of a genocide or ethnic cleansing in Gaza?

    Yes, you’re correct that if there was an overwhelming amount of credible evidence from an almost uncountable number of sources (including the people committing genocide bragging about it) it would be different.

    There’s no equivalence there. Treating these two things as equivalent minimizes (possibly even rises to the level of denying) the actual genocide.

    What would you think of someone who regularly defended a country that supports foreign leaders who regularly quote fascist Hitler and Mussolini supporting intellectuals?

    Even if we accept whatever you’re trying to say here completely at face value, is your stance that someone who says “this specific claim about China is not supported by credible evidence” has to then answer for every single thing any leader in any country ever supported in any way by China has said?

    • Hyperrealism@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      1110·
      6 days ago

      Even if we accept whatever you’re trying to say here completely at face value

      What do you think I’m trying to say?

      • LeninWeave [any]@lemmy.ml
        148·
        6 days ago

        What do you think I’m trying to say?

        I have no idea because you chose to be vague instead of making specific claims about which country and leader China supported. Please stop making every sentence a rhetorical question, just say what you mean directly. Regardless, as I said, it’s not relevant. See the quoted paragraph below from my previous reply.

        is your stance that someone who says “this specific claim about China is not supported by credible evidence” has to then answer for every single thing any leader in any country ever supported in any way by China has said?

        If you're going to reply to this, please actually address the points I originally brought up (copied inside the spoiler) instead of dodging them.

        What would you think of someone who said there was no evidence of a genocide or ethnic cleansing in Gaza?

        Yes, you’re correct that if there was an overwhelming amount of credible evidence from an almost uncountable number of sources (including the people committing genocide bragging about it) it would be different.

        There’s no equivalence there. Treating these two things as equivalent minimizes (possibly even rises to the level of denying) the actual genocide.

        What would you think of someone who regularly defended a country that supports foreign leaders who regularly quote fascist Hitler and Mussolini supporting intellectuals?

        Even if we accept whatever you’re trying to say here completely at face value, is your stance that someone who says “this specific claim about China is not supported by credible evidence” has to then answer for every single thing any leader in any country ever supported in any way by China has said?

              • LeninWeave [any]@lemmy.ml
                135·
                6 days ago

                I believe I don’t know why you even bothered to participate in this discussion if this was what you were going to do.

                  • LeninWeave [any]@lemmy.ml
                    125·
                    6 days ago

                    No. You don’t seem very bright, so I’m not surprised you don’t understand I’m treating you with the seriousness you deserve.

                    Not content with deliberately communicating in a confusing and hostile manner and refusing to clarify or stop when asked, you’ve now progressed to overt ableism in using “not very bright” as an insult and implying someone not understanding your deliberately incomprehensible method of communication is “not very bright”.