MovieChat Forums > bek > Replies
bek's Replies
I hear his healthcare plan is coming in a couple of weeks.
I do have a tendency to continue conversations past their prime. Sorry about that. I have far from been destroyed, unless you count yourself trying to misrepresent what I actually said as "being destroyed." Use my words, not the words you'd wish I'd said, if you want to continue to argue.
Wrong on multiple counts. I never once said there are "no facts" reported by sites I "deem distasteful." There are often facts at those places. Lots of misinformation sites will mix real facts with false information.
I stay away from sites like that and would never use them as a source.
That's not a bad thing.
I don't spread hate. If you hate, maybe it's just who you are.
So long since when? He's still out there spreading his hate.
And how is he related to Prostasia or the rest of this conversation?
You know I can throw out ridiculous Alex Jones or Richard Spencer quotes all night. I'm not sure there'd be a good point to make from it, though.
And your point is... ?
Well, good to know your opinion. lol
QAnoners seem to have an obsession with "saving the children." I was just wondering if that's why you brought it up. No biggie.
I stepped away because you and your ilk are usually too stupid to keep arguing with. It really gets nowhere. For example, I freely admit I've never heard of Prostasia, but for me to take your word for it that they're a "pro-pedophilia" organization would be dumb of me, so I did a quick Google search. Their site says, "We are a child protection organization that combines our zero tolerance of child sexual abuse with our commitment to human and civil rights and sex positivity." Another quick search on the "MAP" thing, and it looks like they're a group of pedophiles trying not to act on their desires. Sounds like the right thing to do. So maybe Prostasia is "pro-pedophilia", maybe not, but the evidence so far points to "not."
Just curious, how much QAnon type stuff have you read? A lot?
Sounds like more nonsense. Any particular reason the critic is a "proponent for pedos", besides the fact he didn't like the movie?
Yeah, I have. Have you? One of my favorite books, Maus, was banned. The right seems to not want us to learn about the Holocaust anymore.
I don't pay a lot of attention to your names. You're all the same to me.
Nonsense. Go enjoy your echo chamber.
"The problem with reporting on those proven lies is that your sources took them as facts and did not question them- which is expected from those on the payroll of the government of course."
You don't know my sources. I haven't mentioned them, but they're better than the rags you're throwing out there. And will these sources you're talking about still be on the "payroll of the government" when the government changes from one party to the other? Or are they truth-tellers then?
"At one point you claim to be skeptical of certain sources but in practice you immediately dismiss any and everything those sources publish, which is a logical fallacy known as ad hominem."
Claiming to be skeptical of a source, then dismissing what they say-- is consistent, and makes sense. However, I don't dismiss "any and everything" these poor sources report. Just a majority of it. Once a source proves itself to be partisan and unreliable, you'd be foolish to keep using it.
I think you need a definition of ad hominem. Here's the link you posted earlier:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem
Lots of people have checked the logs. I don't think it's obsession, but to each his own. Bottom line is that Trump went to Epstein Island just like Clinton did.
"Can you quote me where you mentioned to me that you care about facts and don't put blind faith in you leftists sources?"
How about in the post you were replying to, where I said, "I agree with your sentiment about 'leftist rags.'" I am skeptical of any info from extremist web sites, whether it be DailyKOS or Breitbart. Usually they are extremely biased, at a minimum, and often wrong. That's why I'd never quote them as a source. Only a partisan fool would do that.
As far as Russian assets, pee tapes, and Hunter's laptop, those are all pertinent news stories. I'm not sure why you'd be upset that reputable, and mainstream, news outlets reported on them. It would be crazy not to report on them.
"the fact that you ignore that and continue believing them establishes that you have no interest in facts or truths, only confirmation bias."
Ha! Says the guy posting Breitbart and Daily Caller as his sources for information! Comedy gold.
Check the logs. He's in there over something like 4-5 years, and more than just Miami and NYC.
1. I agree with your sentiment about "leftist rags."
2. It's not true that only one of us has claimed an interest in the facts. Both of us have claimed that, but only one of us posted a bunch of biased "news" sources as his "facts."
I guess if you only read right-wing sources, a right-winger will never be disappointed. I am having a discussion with a right-winger currently, right on this message board, that believed Trump wasn't in the Epstein flight logs. You guys are very susceptible to misinformation because of these unreliable sources.