Search your feelings pedes, you know it to be true...
(media.kotakuinaction2.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (63)
sorted by:
I know, which is why I'm trying to correct your incredibly naïve assertion that Trump, or anyone discussing Epstein, would ever be alluding to anything other than kids. "Young", when talking about Epstein, isn't about girls or boys that are 18, or 19, or 20. It's referring to girls and boys who are 17, 16, 15, 14, 13, and younger. We know this. The entire Pizzagate investigation revealed the true horror of what was happening. It was that investigation which led to the arrest of Epstein. Did you not follow that internet investigation at all? I can share links for you, showing how repugnant it is, how young the kids were and are (although it'll probably have to be via private message or on ConPro, because this website, weirdly, has global censors to any links of it).
You're using your fake naivety as a shield, to protect and give excuse for Trump because of "plausible deniability", when it's obvious to absolutely everyone that Epstein wasn't trafficking people of consensual age. If he was, at most he could be charged for is prostitution and pimping. There's more than enough adults of consensual age willing to commit sexual acts for money. That's not what Epstein was involved in, and everyone that knew him knew what he was involved in.
You're so willing to give any defense of Trump you provide even more defense for known predators, sexual degenerates, subversives, and corruptive and destructive influences and people upon society. You "do not care about them"? I do. I absolutely care about what my enemies are doing, what crimes they're involved in, what kinds of degeneracies they're pushing, what they're influencing or forcing other people to do, about the people they're manipulating and hurting. It's foolishness of extreme severity to give your enemies carte blanche to do whatever they want, purely because "you don't care", just because there aren't laws currently to stop them. There used to be such laws, but most of them have been overturned. Gee, I wonder why? Who could've possibly been involved in overturning our former laws dictating morality? What's happened to Western civilization after the morality of the West loosened to enable these evil people?
Not all that is legal is right, and not all that is illegal is wrong. If you entire defense of the subject is "well legality", you've already lost. Every institution of our civilization has been infiltrated, subverted, and corrupted by these people, including government, bureaucracies, the military, federal oversight and law enforcement organizations, courts, judges, lawyers, Congress, many state and local governments, the medical industry, pharmaceutical industry, schools, school textbooks, school curriculums, history, media, news, social media, food, entertainment, both sides of politics, and our political leaders. Do you expect to be taken seriously in a debate when your defense is "but legality", when these are the corrupt people writing the laws?
Furthermore, are you actually adhering to the globalist/leftist position that sex is harmless? Do you seriously think sex outside of marriage, that prostitution, whoring, "free" sex, and porn are harmless? We have the totality of the current world to show how harmful it is. Hypothetically, lets say Epstein was only trafficking and raping adults. Are you seriously suggesting that this is harmless? Are you so apathetic and numb to the evils of the world, that you don't care about the harms inflicted upon your people, to them, to us? Apathy isn't virtuous. It's inherently destructive. When too many become apathetic to the plight of their own people, nations and civilizations fall. We're in the midst of it. Your apathy is antithetical to your tacit want for a stable and healthy society.
See my above remarks. I absolutely care about it. It's just that not all crimes, or wrongs, or sins, are equal. Hierarchy exists, because differentiation exists. Your argument rests upon the false ideologies of relativism and egalitarianism, insisting that I believe these things as well, which is false. The sexual predation of minors is far worse than sexual predation of adults. You don't fight problems by tackling the least severe first. If your house is on fire, you don't start washing the dishes. You solve the most egregious problems first, and work your way down. But, just because egregious problems exist, doesn't negate the existence of less severe problems. Would you not also punish a murderer for committing rape? The murder doesn't negate the rape, purely because it was less severe? The predation of minors doesn't negate the predation of adults. One is more severe, but both are problems. Your apathy isn't an excuse for either.
You didn't answer the question. Why do you forgive and give constant excuses for Trump, for openly acknowledging the repugnant crimes and proclivities of Epstein, but do not give equal leeway and constant excuse for people like Weinstein, who according to you, is less repulsive?
You don't want to answer the question, because you know it would shine a harsh and condemning light on your own feigned naivety and hypocrisy. You don't levy your views equally, which is what makes you the hypocrite here. Answer the question.
As for your own feigned outrage at my "RAPING BABIES", I only bring up that fact to paint the picture clearly, that there is zero doubt about what's being discussed here, what you are unwilling to acknowledge, because you know it would paint a harsh light on "your guy" (Trump). Epstein abducted, trafficked, raped, tortured, and murdered kids, and helped others do the same, for pleasure and/or for blackmail. You seem to be thoroughly missing this point, the totality of the crimes that were committed, of how many people participated and knew. But, given your words and arguments thus far, it's obvious you don't want to acknowledge by intention, not by ignorance.
But, if you wish, feel free to keep giving defense of people who knew about this. Thus far, Trump and his entire admin, has gone from one lie and botch to another with regard to the release of the Epstein files. They have not charged, arrested, or executed a single person who was implicated in the Epstein files, much less released a damned thing about the files. Oh, I'm sorry, they did "release it", to a bunch of zionist social media influencers, purely for a fucking photo op. Given the just announced news that they're going to censor the Epstein files for "national security", it's pretty much certain they're not going to punish anyone, just like all the other administrations that had power over this (including Trump in his first term), who knew it was happening, who let it happen, who defended it, who excused it, who covered it up, who killed people to keep it quiet. But, feel free to keep giving feigned defense of this, purely because Trump is "your guy". Doing so stains your soul, becoming a willing advocate and defender for the worst people of our times. I will have no part in it.
I did, I defend Pizzagate out loud to people to this day in my persona life. That has nothing to do with this other than you continuing to use the tactic of "BABY RAPE BABY RAPE" to try and emotionally charge your argument. Which is why you are trying to show it to me now too, because just saying it isn't working.
I don't. If women want me to care about them, they can hand back their ill gotten gains from feminism and then I'll gladly burn Weinstein at the stake myself for their honor.
In fact, I got falsely MeToo'd during that initial craze, because an ex roommate was behind on her current rent and needed a sob story to buy her some time. Got the shit beat out of me by a lot of guys who really cared. Just an accusation and their neurons activated to anger, and when the lie came out she was still a victim and not a one came around to apologize for it.
So I in fact have vested interest in not only not giving a shit, but maliciously demanding higher standards for these things.
I've been of the belief he shouldn't have been imprisoned for a long time in fact, because of the aforementioned points I've made. I think his actions were at most disgusting but no less so than the vast majority of the same people who threw him down. But his is still a morally repugnant Jew who'd sell me for a cornchip, so I'm also not going to die trying to change minds on him.
The only excuse I've made for Trump is that the evidence against him is weak and unconvincing to anyone who doesn't fall for Leftie level emotional manipulation. If he is on the list I won't be surprised, just disappointed in him. But you seem to need a full struggle session before you consider it acceptable.
My entire point has been "my mind isn't solidly made up because the evidence isn't there." And that's important, because its been 10 fucking years of them throwing every damning possible accusation at him possible to try and take him down. Including ones with a ton more credible evidence behind it, that ended up being false or overblown too. I'm sure this time though its completely as it seems, the wolf is right there man.
But its all fine. I feel more secure in my position because if you had more convincing positions you'd have brought them. Instead you wrote a philosophy essay in response to your assumptions of my beliefs, and then repeated the same point over and over. And if/when it comes out Trump was on the list, you will still be retarded despite being right.
This is what Epstein was about. How could I deflect toward the core issue? Everyone that knew Epstein knew what he was doing. Everyone that knew people like Harvey Weinstein knew what he was doing. They let it happen. They openly bragged about it to the public. Why do you think raping babies is a deflection?
Then, in your intentional apathy and malignance toward your own people, you would let evil people in power run roughshod over your people, and you, and everyone else you care about. You would have your own people atomized to the nth degree, to let us be corrupted and conquered, purely for your apathy. The fruits of your apathy are destruction. If you apathy was applied universally, all of civilization (even if it were good) would collapse in less than a year.
Well, thank you for at least admitting your motivation. You're not apathetic. You actively hate women, and through that hate, justify your apathy toward your own people, and enable evil people to corrupt and destroy. You would let a wrong committed against you cloud your entire worldview, accepting positions and behaviors which are antithetical to the very conclusion you wish to reach, antithetical to the very prevention of the crime which colored your worldview. You hypocrite.
Then, you indirectly answered my question. You do not view sexual immorality as an issue. You think "free" sex, whoring, prostitution, and porn are harmless, when they're obviously not. You give defense of repugnant and evil people, because you hate women, and through that, hate your own people. The very same people who do these repugnant things in Hollywood are the same people who do the repugnant things with Epstein Et al. They run in the same crowds, hold the same views, vote the same ways, they're all friends with each other, and know what proclivities they're involved in.
I can partially agree, that the evidence against Trump isn't as strong as others, but the evidence still exists. Trump is a billionaire. He rubs shoulders with very powerful people. We've known for a long time that almost all very wealthy people are involved in these evils, or know about them and let them happen. Pretty much all of Hollywood, government, and the uber rich are involved. That's why I pointed back toward Harvey Weinstein, as a mirror to it, for all of the comedians, and actors and actresses, and late night talk shows hosts, and award ceremony acknowledgement speeches, that directly hinted or overtly mentioned what Weinstein was doing. Trump's statement of Epstein was no different. "Young" does not mean consensual age adults when talking about Epstein. Anyone saying otherwise is deluding themselves and giving unjustified defense for Trump.
If Trump is innocent, then how come he, and his entire administration, are actively covering up the Epstein files, for "national security"? If Trump is innocent, then how come he, and his entire administration, are cracking down on "antisemitism", which would criminalize anyone criticizing the people responsible for these repugnant crimes, and the nation involved in running the operation?
Are you still unsure of Trump? What must Trump do to be guilty in your eyes?
You're also forgetting a very clear possibility, that Trump is merely playing the part of a false savior for the dissident right, as another layer of control, that all those attacks against him were pure political theater, just like pro wrestling.
Feel free to remain proud in your position. In your pride and arrogance, you would reject the plain truth. Hopefully you don't, but I've seen that mistake committed far too often, even by good people, to be swayed by this circumstance. This issue isn't over. It's still ongoing. I will see what kind of man you are, whether you are capable of changing your mind, based on the continued cover up of this by Trump, or if you will, in your pride, continue to give excuse and defense of evil.
Because your usage of it is deflection to avoid actually thinking about my point, so instead you retreat to emotionally charged buzzwords and philosophy essays repeated over and over hoping the next time it will work. Its literally designed to mindkill anything but seething hatred to prevent any pesky logic from interrupting your struggle session.
Shit I'm caught. Its not like I have been saying that out loud, openly for so long that even on the Leftist shithole that is KIA1 I had the "flair" of Misogymaster.
You really are bad at this, my guy. I said what he did isn't illegal enough to be imprisoned in my point of view. That has no statement on morality, because asking the government to control morality down to the smallest detailed interaction is a dangerous game I don't wish to play.
Because it creates guys like you, who take incredibly vague statements and treat them as 100% hardened truth that no possible alternative can exist by. And then they feel completely justified in forming lynch mobs off their wild assumptions.
You can make all the differentiations you want between legal and moral, but that is the very antithesis of what our Founding Fathers made this country on and is literally anti-American. And that isn't a label I use lightly.
You truly think too highly of yourself. If a retard like you is ever proud of me, I'll have to reconsider myself.
You talk endlessly about truth, but literally all you do is make grand assumptions and narratives to fit the schema you want to use, and then deny any possibility that doesn't fit that strict set. I merely believe we don't know the truth yet.
You are the worst type of fool.
Your point is deflection. You provide excuse after excuse, apply your rules for judgment and guilt unevenly.
Wow. The abduction, trafficking, raping, torture, and murder of kids is "emotionally charged buzzwords". So, you would have me avoid the core issue itself, of what Epstein was involved in, what everyone who knew him knew what he was involved in, you would have me avoid using the actual words to describe the actual crimes that took place, avoid the words to describe the age of the actual victims, purely to appease your hypocritical stance that I not use "emotionally charged buzzwords"? Why? Because it makes your position look bad? No. I refuse to adjust my accurate language to appease your hypocritical demand on how to discuss this topic.
It's you who doesn't want to discuss the accuracy of what's involved, because you know that if you did, you'd have to actually admit how repugnant it was, and how repugnant everyone involved was, how repugnant everyone is who helps to cover it up.
You don't decry length. You only decry length that disagrees with you. Then, you grasp at straws and throw anything you can against the wall, hoping something sticks, purely because you disagree. This means that you argue in bad faith, that you apply harsh rules against your opponent that you don't follow yourself. This, again, makes you a hypocrite. "Logic"? Logic dictates that the discussion be accurately described, that rules be levied equally and fairly, that the logic be applied consistently. You have not done this, which is why I keep coming back to these core issues, in the (apparently vain) hope that you would see reason. But, as you uncovered in your previous reply, you're entirely biased in your views, and that bias has thoroughly clouded your ability to have any kind of rational or logical discussion surrounding this topic. "Seething hatred"? It is you that admitted to being patently biased because of your hatred toward women.
To be fair, I understand the criticisms of modern women, or even women in general. Women have been thoroughly corrupted by globohomo and feminism. It's not like I'm attempting to white knight women here. I know their faults better than most. But, I only bring up your hatred of women, because you're using that as a clear bias in this discussion. You even openly gave defense of Harvey Weinstein because of your bias, which resulted in you completely skirting around the issue entirely, of the connections between Weinstein and Epstein, of how everyone who knew them knew what they were involved in. But, you skirted around that issue by giving open defense of Weinstein, because of your bias against women.
False dichotomy. It's not an either/or choice. The choices aren't "libertarian hellhole where all immorality and crime is permitted" versus "religiously zealous police state where all morality and minutiae is dictated by the state". You seem to skip over the entire width and breadth of all of reality, where the issue exists, jumping to the furthest extreme, to "debunk" what I was saying. I'm bad at this? Have some self reflection of what you just said.
Furthermore, you are, again, resting your entire position on legality, which of itself is a losing and false issue. Not all that is right is legal, and not all that is wrong is illegal. If you, a supposed rational man, can't determine what is right or wrong, beyond what laws written on books say, then you are completely lost. You tacitly suggest we appeal to authority, another logical fallacy. And, you couch it in a repugnant view that you think all of the modern degenerate sex isn't harmful to people or society. And, again, your view is entirely dictated by your bias/hate against women. You don't want to cast blame against people like Weinstein, because you seem to tacitly approve of him hurting women, and in turn, condone the harm of your own people.
You do realize I brought up those morality laws to show to clear correlation between the overturning of those previous morality laws, and the degeneration of society? I'm not arguing for a tyrannical hellscape where all actions are decided by the state. I've never argued that. Feel free to dig into my timeline (going back years), to see where I've ever argued for that. Quote me. I dare you.
You apparently didn't know the Founding Fathers very well. They intended the U.S. to be dictated by Christian morality, for Christians and by Christians, for White people and by White people. They didn't want every religion under the sun to become citizenry of some amorphous U.S. blob. The problem lied between Christian denominations, not between different religions entirely. They also ONLY applied that rule to the federal government, not upon state or local governments. Your (mis)understanding of this issue is at fault, not mine.
Furthermore, morality can absolutely be dictated by law. That's literally what all laws are, the criminalization of what's immoral (wrong) and legalization of what's moral (right). How in the hell would you dictate laws and legality in your world? Relativism? Truth is absolute, so is logic, and so is morality. People's understanding of those foundations may change, but the truth does not. There are clearly superior and inferior forms and understandings, governances, and laws. And, ever since we got rid of the most basic of moral laws, our nation, our civilization, has turned to shit. By the fruits a thing/person can be judged, and your defense of libertarian hedonism is a condemnation against you and your argument.
I self doubt always. I challenge my own ideas all the time. That's why I engage in these long form debates. I actually like to be proven wrong. I like to learn new arguments and ideas, because it enables me to better learn and understand truth. Weak men hold weak ideas, because neither is challenged. Look through my profile. I've done these long form debates many times. I don't shirk away from them.
Just because I accurately ascribe to you your own beliefs, your own failings, and the results of what you espouse, is not a reflection upon me, but of you. You, of course, disagree, but disagreement does not equate to me being false. Our views on the matter do not change the truth. Just because I disagree with you does not make me "retard(ed)", or "think too highly of myself".
What grand assumptions did I make? Point to them. Be specific. Why are they wrong? What schema did I use? Point to them. Be specific. Why are they wrong?
Well, uhhhh, yeah. That's quite literally why I believe what I do, and don't believe what I don't. I judge based on that. How else am I supposed to act and judge? It's also why I constantly challenge my own ideas, and seek opponents worthy enough to prove me wrong, and read other people's opinions, arguments, and evidence constantly.
Well, as to what we can verify, sure. We don't know, for certain, that Trump was involved. We don't have a notorized governmental form, a timestamped notarized governmental approved video with Trump literally "RAPING BABIES!". What I've been trying to point out, this entire time, is that we can infer a lot based on the available evidence, about how these people act, what they believe, the company they keep, and all of the relevant patterns that exist. By all of that standard of measure, Trump is guilty. And, given the cover up of the Epstein files his administration is currently doing, blatantly proves this. Even if you were correct, by some miracle of chance, Trump is still guilty of covering up the crimes of Epstein and everyone else involved. He was guilty of it during his first term, and he's even more guilty of it now, by actively covering it up, for "national security".
That's only part of the sentence. The true form is "Because you disagree with me, you are the worst type of fool."
Why am I a fool? Why am I the worst type of fool? Be specific. When we truly dig down, it will be patently obvious that it's only because I dared to disagree with you, and point out your own bias and hypocrisy. If you actually look through my profile and look at all the other debates I've gotten in with people, you'll notice, just as I did, that most people are loathe to have their worldview challenged. People don't want to change their minds, no matter how many sound arguments, logic, and evidence you present them. They'd rather stick their fingers in their ears and scream as loud as possible. They'd rather denigrate and attack the person trying to teach them. They'd rather censor and kill the person who disagrees with them, than ever change their stance one iota. It's a shame really, but it's a repeated pattern of behavior I've seen in my own debates, and in debates between others. Truly, I don't know how most people actually change their minds, given the preponderance of evidence of how stubborn they can be to the most blindingly blatant truth. It seems most people would happily rather die, than ever to admit to being wrong, even on the smallest of issues.