I will answer this question just as soon as you answer this one, that you've dodged FOUR TIMES now.
But let's test how much you actually believe what you're trying to sell here. Let's pretend that everything in the video above was exactly the same....except ....substitute "Illegals" for "Christians" and "FBI" for "ICE", and set it a year ago, when Biden was in the White House. Would you have so readily been all for it? Defended it so thoroughly? Be honest. Actually answer this one question, if you do ANYTHING. Yes or No? Would you still have the same opinion of it as you've detailed above?
And I doubt you'll ever acknowledge that you can't answer that question ( that you've dodged FIVE TIMES NOW )honestly without admitting a contradiction in your world view.
Admitting "no" (you wouldn't support it under Biden) would reveal that your endorsement is purely partisan, tied to trusting the current power alignment rather than principle.
Saying that you would have just as strongly supported Biden in using AI to coordinate with the FBI to put Christians under the same sort of surveillance would go over like a turd in a punch bowl.
So, you just keep trying to deflect from the question, with ad hominem arguments and trying to bring my personal reasons for being here into question.
It's why you can't leave my post up without yet another stab at poisoning the well. If you succeed in getting people to question why I'm here, then maybe they'll forget that your entire stance is nothing but hypocrisy.
But maybe I'm wrong.
Let's test my theory.
Let's see if you escalate yet again in your efforts to poison the well, or if you'll be brave enough to answer this very simple question:
So, for the (what is it now? FIFTH? SIXTH? time?):
But let's test how much you actually believe what you're trying to sell here. Let's pretend that everything in the video above was exactly the same....except ....substitute "Illegals" for "Christians" and "FBI" for "ICE", and set it a year ago, when Biden was in the White House. Would you have so readily been all for it? Defended it so thoroughly? Be honest. Actually answer this one question, if you do ANYTHING. Yes or No? Would you still have the same opinion of it as you've detailed above?
You should just go ahead and either respond to this question or just give up in trying to deflect attention away from it. Because as long as you continue the conversation, I'll continue asking you about it and why you refuse to answer it.
No, you haven't. It's a simple yes or no. You dance around the question, deflecting here, there, and everywhere.
But let's pretend that you have, and I've just missed it SIX TIMES IN A ROW or that I'm particularly dumb and can't figure out if you meant yes or no.
So just make it easy for everyone and bring all this to an end right here.
Answer yes or no to this question. That's it. Yes or no. Clear enough even the most simple person could understand.
But let's test how much you actually believe what you're trying to sell here. Let's pretend that everything in the video above was exactly the same....except ....substitute "Illegals" for "Christians" and "FBI" for "ICE", and set it a year ago, when Biden was in the White House. Would you have so readily been all for it? Defended it so thoroughly? Be honest. Actually answer this one question, if you do ANYTHING. Yes or No? Would you still have the same opinion of it as you've detailed above?
No need to try to deflect. No need to try to weasel out of answering. You can answer simply "yes" or "no" and we can be done with this entire conversation right now. We'd both save a ton of time and effort of going back and forth over it.
I will answer this question just as soon as you answer this one, that you've dodged FOUR TIMES now.
I doubt you'll admit to being yet another nuthin ever happens type, despite all the evidence to the contrary.
And I doubt you'll ever acknowledge that you can't answer that question ( that you've dodged FIVE TIMES NOW )honestly without admitting a contradiction in your world view.
Admitting "no" (you wouldn't support it under Biden) would reveal that your endorsement is purely partisan, tied to trusting the current power alignment rather than principle.
Saying that you would have just as strongly supported Biden in using AI to coordinate with the FBI to put Christians under the same sort of surveillance would go over like a turd in a punch bowl.
So, you just keep trying to deflect from the question, with ad hominem arguments and trying to bring my personal reasons for being here into question.
It's why you can't leave my post up without yet another stab at poisoning the well. If you succeed in getting people to question why I'm here, then maybe they'll forget that your entire stance is nothing but hypocrisy.
But maybe I'm wrong.
Let's test my theory.
Let's see if you escalate yet again in your efforts to poison the well, or if you'll be brave enough to answer this very simple question:
So, for the (what is it now? FIFTH? SIXTH? time?):
You should just go ahead and either respond to this question or just give up in trying to deflect attention away from it. Because as long as you continue the conversation, I'll continue asking you about it and why you refuse to answer it.
I've answered your question more times than I've alluded to you being a shill/doomer.
No, you haven't. It's a simple yes or no. You dance around the question, deflecting here, there, and everywhere.
But let's pretend that you have, and I've just missed it SIX TIMES IN A ROW or that I'm particularly dumb and can't figure out if you meant yes or no.
So just make it easy for everyone and bring all this to an end right here.
Answer yes or no to this question. That's it. Yes or no. Clear enough even the most simple person could understand.
No need to try to deflect. No need to try to weasel out of answering. You can answer simply "yes" or "no" and we can be done with this entire conversation right now. We'd both save a ton of time and effort of going back and forth over it.
So...YES?
Or NO?