Do you honestly believe such ad hominems and false groupings help you make your case better?
Not that I mean to suggest you actually made a case. You simply proclaimed an ad hominem, attempted to group me with a group that you think are "automatically wrong", didn't address a single thing I said, and implied "incredulity" at an opinion that differs from your own.
I suggest if you want to make a case to promote your opinion or belief, you should try to actually make one..
I think it is highly likely that the assassination was a white hat scripted event. I have made that case a few dozen times over the past few days. If you wish to see what I have said on the matter, feel free to read my history. Having said that:
if you agree with the leftists
This is a false grouping. It doesn't matter what "group" someone belongs to or may agree with. All that matters is evidence and logic. Attempting to group me with someone you don't like is a fallacious argument (specifically an association fallacy). My argument is my argument and it stands (or doesn't) on it's own. This is true regardless of who else may espouse a similar conclusion.
Association fallacies are among the worst (or at least among the most common fallacies), and are what drive The Matrix. We have been trained to make such fallacious arguments all our lives; in school, in books, in the media, etc.. Unlearning this training is essential to the GA.
Ok, so if I'd left out "agree with leftists", you wouldn't have taken such umbrage?
Granted, they believe it due to massive TDS, while you believe it via (purportedly - I haven't read your history, yet) logic and evidence, but you believe the same thing:
Donald Trump faked this assassination attempt in order to get elected.
So, it's not at all a false grouping - you believe what the leftists believe, and playing nuance with your words doesn't change that.
In case you're unsure, I'm NOT arguing with you. I honestly don't know what to believe, now that the initial emotional shock has subsided. As I mentioned, you're the first on this side of the aisle that I've seen with that take, and I'm looking forward to reading your previous comments.
One more question before I dig into your history: If the Q team staged a fake assassination attempt, how are we any better than the cabal? If you're right, then both sides are simply creating fake events to instill fear in the populace for political gain.
This is an association fallacy. Whether it is true or not is 100% irrelevant to any logical argument, that is why it is a fallacy. It is used to bolster an argument (or just an opinion if you prefer) through an appeal to pathos, which is, by definition, an illogical argument (not an appeal to logos).
If the Q team staged a fake assassination attempt, how are we any better than the cabal?
It's a bit of a read, but you are welcome to read this response to a similar question I gave earlier today. Note it is in two parts, though the second part is a fair bit shorter. Like I said, it's a bit of a read, but I believe it will fully answer your question.
Do you honestly believe such ad hominems and false groupings help you make your case better?
Not that I mean to suggest you actually made a case. You simply proclaimed an ad hominem, attempted to group me with a group that you think are "automatically wrong", didn't address a single thing I said, and implied "incredulity" at an opinion that differs from your own.
I suggest if you want to make a case to promote your opinion or belief, you should try to actually make one..
Not making a case at all (why are you adding your own context to my simple question?)
I just want to know if you agree with the leftists we all see on social media claiming that the assassination attempt was faked?
I think it is highly likely that the assassination was a white hat scripted event. I have made that case a few dozen times over the past few days. If you wish to see what I have said on the matter, feel free to read my history. Having said that:
This is a false grouping. It doesn't matter what "group" someone belongs to or may agree with. All that matters is evidence and logic. Attempting to group me with someone you don't like is a fallacious argument (specifically an association fallacy). My argument is my argument and it stands (or doesn't) on it's own. This is true regardless of who else may espouse a similar conclusion.
Association fallacies are among the worst (or at least among the most common fallacies), and are what drive The Matrix. We have been trained to make such fallacious arguments all our lives; in school, in books, in the media, etc.. Unlearning this training is essential to the GA.
Ok, so if I'd left out "agree with leftists", you wouldn't have taken such umbrage?
Granted, they believe it due to massive TDS, while you believe it via (purportedly - I haven't read your history, yet) logic and evidence, but you believe the same thing:
Donald Trump faked this assassination attempt in order to get elected.
So, it's not at all a false grouping - you believe what the leftists believe, and playing nuance with your words doesn't change that.
In case you're unsure, I'm NOT arguing with you. I honestly don't know what to believe, now that the initial emotional shock has subsided. As I mentioned, you're the first on this side of the aisle that I've seen with that take, and I'm looking forward to reading your previous comments.
One more question before I dig into your history: If the Q team staged a fake assassination attempt, how are we any better than the cabal? If you're right, then both sides are simply creating fake events to instill fear in the populace for political gain.
This is an association fallacy. Whether it is true or not is 100% irrelevant to any logical argument, that is why it is a fallacy. It is used to bolster an argument (or just an opinion if you prefer) through an appeal to pathos, which is, by definition, an illogical argument (not an appeal to logos).
It's a bit of a read, but you are welcome to read this response to a similar question I gave earlier today. Note it is in two parts, though the second part is a fair bit shorter. Like I said, it's a bit of a read, but I believe it will fully answer your question.