You don't "see through me", you don't see me, or acknowledge me at all, no matter how many time I tell you what I am and what my opinions are. You don't care, because you have a narrative to fulfill.
"They did it again" is absolutely, unequivocally, definitive. You have concluded, without evidence, as you admit, to this being an assassination.
Since you've argued against it, then let's say your only issue is AIPAC themselves, as an institution, perchance even as a front for Mossad, just for giggles (because lobbyist organizations aren't known for assassinating people on their lonesome).
You're saying that AIPAC is so scared that a single congressman from Kentucky will upend their entire influence racket (despite the fact that they have in-roads with the whole of congress, senate, and both presidential candidates), that they are going to murder his wife. Not him, that would be obviously crazy. No no, they are going to murder his wife. They are also not going to make any sort of assassinations with regard to any of the Pro-Palestine movements in the US that are actively funding Hamas. I'll bet you that Ilhan Omar doesn't have an AIPAC person.
That's lunacy. Massie is, himself, not relevant enough or powerful enough to assassinate (nor is murdering his wife necessary). He has done nothing to impact AIPAC funding, he will continue to do nothing to stop AIPAC funding, and he is simply going to be one of the random libertarian-ish figures that occasionally sticks in their craw.
There are major forces looking to defund AIPAC, and all of them are Pro-Palestinian Progressive candidates. None of them have been harmed. It is silly to jump to the conclusion that it had to be an assassination.
Let's try this: If Massie explains the death of his wife as having been from natural circumstances, and his AIPAC position does not change; will you admit you are wrong?
Is there any way you would recognize your claim to be false?
...you don't see me, or acknowledge me at all, no matter how many time I tell you what I am and what my opinions are.
Cringe!
You don't care, because you have a narrative to fulfill.
What's the narrative? Go ahead, tell me what my narrative is. National Socialism, right? Total Jew death, right? None of which I've ever called for or hinted at, yet you keep smearing a bunch of us with that nonsense.
Since you've argued against it, then let's say your only issue is AIPAC themselves, as an institution...
What would my other issue be? Go ahead. I'm getting tired of your nonsense, man.
...perchance even as a front for Mossad, just for giggles (because lobbyist organizations aren't known for assassinating people on their lonesome).
Uhm, "lobbyists" are often just literal mobsters, in the right circumstance. Are you saying politically connected agents have never killed anyone? Dem-connected groups have killed people. Republican-connected groups have killed people. Lobbyist organizations have killed people. Unions have killed people. It's all corrupt. Yeah, lobbyist-connected people would absolutely kill to further political ends.
You're saying that AIPAC is so scared that a single congressman from Kentucky will upend their entire influence racket (despite the fact that they have in-roads with the whole of congress, senate, and both presidential candidates), that they are going to murder his wife.
Where did I say they were scared? Seriously, where? I said they could potentially be sending a message. Which is "don't fuck with us." Which, even given your framework, would be required. They have to keep that position. They have to keep that near 100% success rate. They have to be able to say "see, being pro-Israel is good business." It's their whole racket. So, yes, in that case, if Massie slipped through the cracks, or if they hadn't taken out that retard Bowman, or anyone else they campaigned against, those people are threats. Not necessarily on their own, but it snowballs. Massie doesn't singlehandedly destroy AIPAC's influence, but it does hurt them.
Not him, that would be obviously crazy. No no, they are going to murder his wife.
Yeah. Nowhere in history has anyone ever killed an enemy's family. That's retarded, you're right. Why do that, when you can kill the man himself? Yeah! You're so smart. Never happens.
You're reaching, bigly.
I'll bet you that Ilhan Omar doesn't have an AIPAC person.
And she and "the Squad" are literally on the AIPAC (political) hitlist. They're actively campaigning against those people. So I don't get your point.
"First, @JamaalBowmanNY. Now, @CoriBush." - AIPAC retweeted that the day Massie's wife died. And, no, I'm not saying they're connected, just pointing out it's recent. They literally have hitlists on the Squad.
That's lunacy. Massie is, himself, not relevant enough or powerful enough to assassinate (nor is murdering his wife necessary).
He's one of less than five hundred people in Congress. That's incredibly relevant. He's around a quarter of a percent, on his own. And he gets to speak to the others, and the press. And you only need 218 to pass something.
Also, who said anything about necessary? No action is every strictly necessary. But it might be expedient, or otherwise a good way toward progressing your goals.
He has done nothing to impact AIPAC funding...
But he hurt their record. They've been trying to get rid of him, but keep failing. It hurts their record and their image. You kill someone before they can hurt you, if you're playing that game. Again, this really isn't rocket science.
There are major forces looking to defund AIPAC, and all of them are Pro-Palestinian Progressive candidates.
Oh, please get a new schtick, man.
Let's try this: If Massie explains the death of his wife as having been from natural circumstances, and his AIPAC position does not change; will you admit you are wrong?
Wrong about what? That I thought it was a potential assassination? Nope. At the moment I do think that.
Is there any way you would recognize your claim to be false?
You'll notice I'm not going to do the massive quote-thing because it breaks up conversations, and typically removes context from the very thing that gets quoted. It gets even worse, when those quotes get broken into even more quotes in the responses, and then you quote responses of quotes which lose track of the entire conversation.
Political hit-lists, are not real hit-lists. That is why The Squad, and their family members are not assassinated. The Pro-Palestinian Progressives are not a schtick, they are the primary anti-Israel force in the US and have been for some time. AIPAC doesn't have a 100% success rate, they didn't before, and they don't now, and I've seen nothing to suggest they killed anyone's family.
Your original claim was that AIPAC assassinated Massie's wife. You stated it unequivocally. It does seem like you are now backing off that claim by denying you made it.
You'll notice I'm not going to do the massive quote-thing because it breaks up conversations, and typically removes context from the very thing that gets quoted.
It's just how I structure my thoughts. Plenty of people do it. And I don't just do it when I'm arguing against people. But, sure, attack the medium, when you're badly losing the argument.
Not only am I a Nazi, but I structure my internet arguments wrong too, you got me.
Political hit-lists, are not real hit-lists.
Which. Is. Why. I. Specified. That. It. Was. A. Political. Hit. List.
If I thought they were the same, I would have just left it at 'hit list,' dude.
The Pro-Palestinian Progressives are not a schtick...
I didn't say they were, I said you blaming everything on them, and trying to smear anyone who criticizes Israel of being a socialist/communist/progressive/whatever, was a schtick.
I'd ask you to get some reading comprehension, but I know it's intentional. You've said I demand 'good faith,' and I do, but you're really arguing in incredibly bad faith, non stop. It's weak shit.
Your original claim was that AIPAC assassinated Massie's wife. You stated it unequivocally. It does seem like you are now backing off that claim by denying you made it.
Uhm. Every time you've asked if that's my claim, I've said no. I suspect they killed his wife. You know this. Again, you're being intentionally obtuse.
Again, you are projecting the level of generalization and bad faith that you are using against me as if I'm using it against you. I didn't say that your quotes are wrong. I just know that people inevitably claim "you're not responding to my arguments, you know your losing the argument", as you did, when they notice I'm not quoting them. I'm just saying I find it to be unhelpful.
I know you specified political hit-lists. That is my point. A political hit-list is a lot different from a real hit-list. We can't assume that someone with a political hit-list is interested in actual hits.
And since you want be to be extremely specific with your wording, you didn't say that I blame Pro-Palestinian Progressives, despite your current statement. You basically didn't say anything at all besides a kind of generic dismissal. That is why demanding I not imply anything from your comments is a problem. And no, I don't smear everyone as socialist/communist/progressive because those are all different things.
You haven't been arguing in good faith, because you've assumed, from the outset, that I've been arguing in bad faith. Despite the fact that I immediately backed down from saying that you claimed that international jewry assassinated Massie's wife. This is because I believe you and acted accordingly.
I didn't ask you once about your initial claim because your initial claim was clear and unequivocal; but you backed down from it, so there's nothing to really argue about except the argument.
You don't "see through me", you don't see me, or acknowledge me at all, no matter how many time I tell you what I am and what my opinions are. You don't care, because you have a narrative to fulfill.
"They did it again" is absolutely, unequivocally, definitive. You have concluded, without evidence, as you admit, to this being an assassination.
Since you've argued against it, then let's say your only issue is AIPAC themselves, as an institution, perchance even as a front for Mossad, just for giggles (because lobbyist organizations aren't known for assassinating people on their lonesome).
You're saying that AIPAC is so scared that a single congressman from Kentucky will upend their entire influence racket (despite the fact that they have in-roads with the whole of congress, senate, and both presidential candidates), that they are going to murder his wife. Not him, that would be obviously crazy. No no, they are going to murder his wife. They are also not going to make any sort of assassinations with regard to any of the Pro-Palestine movements in the US that are actively funding Hamas. I'll bet you that Ilhan Omar doesn't have an AIPAC person.
That's lunacy. Massie is, himself, not relevant enough or powerful enough to assassinate (nor is murdering his wife necessary). He has done nothing to impact AIPAC funding, he will continue to do nothing to stop AIPAC funding, and he is simply going to be one of the random libertarian-ish figures that occasionally sticks in their craw.
There are major forces looking to defund AIPAC, and all of them are Pro-Palestinian Progressive candidates. None of them have been harmed. It is silly to jump to the conclusion that it had to be an assassination.
Let's try this: If Massie explains the death of his wife as having been from natural circumstances, and his AIPAC position does not change; will you admit you are wrong?
Is there any way you would recognize your claim to be false?
Cringe!
What's the narrative? Go ahead, tell me what my narrative is. National Socialism, right? Total Jew death, right? None of which I've ever called for or hinted at, yet you keep smearing a bunch of us with that nonsense.
What would my other issue be? Go ahead. I'm getting tired of your nonsense, man.
Uhm, "lobbyists" are often just literal mobsters, in the right circumstance. Are you saying politically connected agents have never killed anyone? Dem-connected groups have killed people. Republican-connected groups have killed people. Lobbyist organizations have killed people. Unions have killed people. It's all corrupt. Yeah, lobbyist-connected people would absolutely kill to further political ends.
Where did I say they were scared? Seriously, where? I said they could potentially be sending a message. Which is "don't fuck with us." Which, even given your framework, would be required. They have to keep that position. They have to keep that near 100% success rate. They have to be able to say "see, being pro-Israel is good business." It's their whole racket. So, yes, in that case, if Massie slipped through the cracks, or if they hadn't taken out that retard Bowman, or anyone else they campaigned against, those people are threats. Not necessarily on their own, but it snowballs. Massie doesn't singlehandedly destroy AIPAC's influence, but it does hurt them.
Yeah. Nowhere in history has anyone ever killed an enemy's family. That's retarded, you're right. Why do that, when you can kill the man himself? Yeah! You're so smart. Never happens.
You're reaching, bigly.
And she and "the Squad" are literally on the AIPAC (political) hitlist. They're actively campaigning against those people. So I don't get your point.
"First, @JamaalBowmanNY. Now, @CoriBush." - AIPAC retweeted that the day Massie's wife died. And, no, I'm not saying they're connected, just pointing out it's recent. They literally have hitlists on the Squad.
He's one of less than five hundred people in Congress. That's incredibly relevant. He's around a quarter of a percent, on his own. And he gets to speak to the others, and the press. And you only need 218 to pass something.
Also, who said anything about necessary? No action is every strictly necessary. But it might be expedient, or otherwise a good way toward progressing your goals.
But he hurt their record. They've been trying to get rid of him, but keep failing. It hurts their record and their image. You kill someone before they can hurt you, if you're playing that game. Again, this really isn't rocket science.
Oh, please get a new schtick, man.
Wrong about what? That I thought it was a potential assassination? Nope. At the moment I do think that.
What. Claim.
You're being ridiculous.
You'll notice I'm not going to do the massive quote-thing because it breaks up conversations, and typically removes context from the very thing that gets quoted. It gets even worse, when those quotes get broken into even more quotes in the responses, and then you quote responses of quotes which lose track of the entire conversation.
Political hit-lists, are not real hit-lists. That is why The Squad, and their family members are not assassinated. The Pro-Palestinian Progressives are not a schtick, they are the primary anti-Israel force in the US and have been for some time. AIPAC doesn't have a 100% success rate, they didn't before, and they don't now, and I've seen nothing to suggest they killed anyone's family.
Your original claim was that AIPAC assassinated Massie's wife. You stated it unequivocally. It does seem like you are now backing off that claim by denying you made it.
It's just how I structure my thoughts. Plenty of people do it. And I don't just do it when I'm arguing against people. But, sure, attack the medium, when you're badly losing the argument.
Not only am I a Nazi, but I structure my internet arguments wrong too, you got me.
Which. Is. Why. I. Specified. That. It. Was. A. Political. Hit. List.
If I thought they were the same, I would have just left it at 'hit list,' dude.
I didn't say they were, I said you blaming everything on them, and trying to smear anyone who criticizes Israel of being a socialist/communist/progressive/whatever, was a schtick.
I'd ask you to get some reading comprehension, but I know it's intentional. You've said I demand 'good faith,' and I do, but you're really arguing in incredibly bad faith, non stop. It's weak shit.
Uhm. Every time you've asked if that's my claim, I've said no. I suspect they killed his wife. You know this. Again, you're being intentionally obtuse.
Again, you are projecting the level of generalization and bad faith that you are using against me as if I'm using it against you. I didn't say that your quotes are wrong. I just know that people inevitably claim "you're not responding to my arguments, you know your losing the argument", as you did, when they notice I'm not quoting them. I'm just saying I find it to be unhelpful.
I know you specified political hit-lists. That is my point. A political hit-list is a lot different from a real hit-list. We can't assume that someone with a political hit-list is interested in actual hits.
And since you want be to be extremely specific with your wording, you didn't say that I blame Pro-Palestinian Progressives, despite your current statement. You basically didn't say anything at all besides a kind of generic dismissal. That is why demanding I not imply anything from your comments is a problem. And no, I don't smear everyone as socialist/communist/progressive because those are all different things.
You haven't been arguing in good faith, because you've assumed, from the outset, that I've been arguing in bad faith. Despite the fact that I immediately backed down from saying that you claimed that international jewry assassinated Massie's wife. This is because I believe you and acted accordingly.
I didn't ask you once about your initial claim because your initial claim was clear and unequivocal; but you backed down from it, so there's nothing to really argue about except the argument.