The rationalization of politics

Originally posted by Surtur
blah blah triggered blah blah. And blah blah triggers blah blah.

same tired shtick, with nothing refuted (or even attempted). same old squirt.

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
Hold up.... I seem to remember you were the one who did the original comparative there Surt. In the first thread, the one about Dreadlock girl, you cracked it with everyone because we did not agree that a near 300 pound Neo Nazi punching a girl less than a third of his size to the ground was good. You argued for several dozen pages that because she was Antifa it was alright.

The very next time I saw the comparative being made was when a Neo Nazi was trying to mow people down with his car, killing one woman. Now, neither person there had anything to do with Antifa, and yet the very first thing that gets mentined by you is Antifa. That time YOU made the comparative, and you pulled out out of nowhere for no reason other than to continue your grievance.

Now, I'm not going to go quote hunting through utterly ancient threads, I'm bedridden and sick and not up to that sort of thing anymore... but you get my point. I don't think anybody cares that you hate Antifa. What matters is that your hatred seems to spurn you into spinning absolute lies and exaggerations on top of legitimate wrongs they may do, and then you bring them up in places where mentioning them is completely unwanted, unwarranted and unneeded.

whoops, didn't mean to flip the page on this gem 👆

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
Hold up.... I seem to remember you were the one who did the original comparative there Surt. In the first thread, the one about Dreadlock girl, you cracked it with everyone because we did not agree that a near 300 pound Neo Nazi punching a girl less than a third of his size to the ground was good. You argued for several dozen pages that because she was Antifa it was alright.

The very next time I saw the comparative being made was when a Neo Nazi was trying to mow people down with his car, killing one woman. Now, neither person there had anything to do with Antifa, and yet the very first thing that gets mentined by you is Antifa. That time YOU made the comparative, and you pulled out out of nowhere for no reason other than to continue your grievance.

Now, I'm not going to go quote hunting through utterly ancient threads, I'm bedridden and sick and not up to that sort of thing anymore... but you get my point. I don't think anybody cares that you hate Antifa. What matters is that your hatred seems to spurn you into spinning absolute lies and exaggerations on top of legitimate wrongs they may do, and then you bring them up in places where mentioning them is completely unwanted, unwarranted and unneeded.

Yawn. This is bullshit, but you'll get a bingo from the usual suspects.

I stopped reading after your first lie. I didn't say because she was Antifa it was alright. It was specifically about the fact she had participated in violence.

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
Hold up.... I seem to remember you were the one who did the original comparative there Surt. In the first thread, the one about Dreadlock girl, you cracked it with everyone because we did not agree that a near 300 pound Neo Nazi punching a girl less than a third of his size to the ground was good. You argued for several dozen pages that because she was Antifa it was alright.

The very next time I saw the comparative being made was when a Neo Nazi was trying to mow people down with his car, killing one woman. Now, neither person there had anything to do with Antifa, and yet the very first thing that gets mentined by you is Antifa. That time YOU made the comparative, and you pulled out out of nowhere for no reason other than to continue your grievance.

Now, I'm not going to go quote hunting through utterly ancient threads, I'm bedridden and sick and not up to that sort of thing anymore... but you get my point. I don't think anybody cares that you hate Antifa. What matters is that your hatred seems to spurn you into spinning absolute lies and exaggerations on top of legitimate wrongs they may do, and then you bring them up in places where mentioning them is completely unwanted, unwarranted and unneeded.

Bingo

Bingo

Bingo

#CalledIt

Originally posted by Surtur
Yawn. This is bullshit, but you'll get a bingo from the usual suspects.

I stopped reading after your first lie. I didn't say because she was Antifa it was alright. It was specifically about the fact she had participated in violence.

You didn't bring that up until later. But you originally justified it because she went there as a member of Antifa. Your words, not mine.

Oh, and good on you eliminating context to suit yourself, but if your going to snip posts, then you don't deserve to be on KMC, or any other discussion forum.

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
You didn't bring that up until later. But you originally justified it because she went there as a member of Antifa. Your words, not mine.

Oh, and good on you eliminating context to suit yourself, but if your going to snip posts, then you don't deserve to be on KMC, or any other discussion forum.

She went there with the intention to do violence, posted about it, and did violence. She got hit while in the middle of a fight. You can see it in the clip.

And the "you don't deserve to be on KMC " is more nonsense. It's why I largely ignore you. Selective whining.

DZ's truthbomb sure did a number on you, sport. It's why you're dancing now.

Originally posted by Surtur
She went there with the intention to do violence, posted about it, and did violence.

And the "you don't deserve to be on KMC " is more nonsense. It's why I largely ignore you. Selective whining.

You could not prove she actually participated in violence at the time. Holding a bottle in her hand in the middle of a riot is not a crime in and of itself.

No, it's not. You missed several important points because "HUFF HUFF, He's not agreeing with me!" It's funny to watch, but it proves that even when Antifa isn't involved with a subject, you bring them up just to say "**** Antifa". Even when a person is killed.

Not to mention you didn't read the last paragraph.

Like I said, selective reading to suit your context just to suit yourself is classic Surter. But go back, read it. I dare you.

Originally posted by Robtard
DZ's truthbomb sure did a number on you, sport. It's why you're dancing now.

There is no need to dance. The clip of her getting hit showed her in the midst of a fight when it happened. That is how I found out about it.

Later on, we got more examples of her committing violence at the event.

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero

But go back, read it. I dare you.

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
You could not prove she actually participated in violence at the time. Holding a bottle in her hand in the middle of a riot is not a crime in and of itself.

Lol wow. I couldn't prove it, but it was my opinion at the time she did. From the beginning.

No, it's not. You missed several important points because "HUFF HUFF, He's not agreeing with me!" It's funny to watch, but it proves that even when Antifa isn't involved with a subject, you bring them up just to say "**** Antifa". Even when a person is killed.

Yes, it is nonsense. You were already peddling bullshit, no need to indulge it further.

Not to mention you didn't read the last paragraph.

Like I said, selective reading to suit your context just to suit yourself is classic Surter. But go back, read it. I dare you.

But again: from the very beginning I thought she had participated in violence lol.

^ Bernard being a Bernard after he was challenged to go back and see for himself.

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
Hold up.... I seem to remember you were the one who did the original comparative there Surt. In the first thread, the one about Dreadlock girl, you cracked it with everyone because we did not agree that a near 300 pound Neo Nazi punching a girl less than a third of his size to the ground was good. You argued for several dozen pages that because she was Antifa it was alright.

The very next time I saw the comparative being made was when a Neo Nazi was trying to mow people down with his car, killing one woman. Now, neither person there had anything to do with Antifa, and yet the very first thing that gets mentined by you is Antifa. That time YOU made the comparative, and you pulled out out of nowhere for no reason other than to continue your grievance.

Now, I'm not going to go quote hunting through utterly ancient threads, I'm bedridden and sick and not up to that sort of thing anymore... but you get my point. I don't think anybody cares that you hate Antifa. What matters is that your hatred seems to spurn you into spinning absolute lies and exaggerations on top of legitimate wrongs they may do, and then you bring them up in places where mentioning them is completely unwanted, unwarranted and unneeded.

Originally posted by Surtur
There is no need to dance. The clip of her getting hit showed her in the midst of a fight when it happened. That is how I found out about it.

Later on, we got more examples of her committing violence at the event.

Ja, because her squatting beside her bleeding boyfriends head is a crime now.... "She participated!" She was trying to keep her man from being mauled by a pack of Neo Nazis.

Originally posted by Surtur
Lol wow. I couldn't prove it, but it was my opinion at the time she did. From the beginning.

And?

Originally posted by Surtur
Yes, it is nonsense. You were already peddling bullshit, no need to indulge it further.

Except I wasn't. Nor does one completely separate point invalidate another completely separate point. If you cannot argue the complete point because your lazy then say so. Don't blame me when i'm not wrong in what I said. Perhaps then you should not have replied at all.

Originally posted by Surtur
But again: from the very beginning I thought she had participated in violence lol.

Which does not diminish my point at all.

Originally posted by darthgoober
Wait, what confirmation do you have that the guy who punched the dread girl is a neo nazi?

Because he was a convicted criminal with known white supremacy connections.

Originally posted by Robtard
^ Bernard being a Bernard after he was challenged to go back and see for himself.

I don't need to go back and see, Darkstorm Zero confirmed that for me with what he just said.

The comment about me being unable to prove right away she was involved doesn't change the fact from the beginning I thought she was involved in the violence. So yes, I said someone I thought from the beginning was involved in violence having violence done back to her was fair game.

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
Because he was a convicted criminal with known white supremacy connections.

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
Because he was a convicted criminal with known white supremacy connections.

uh oh. inconvenient fact. get ready for more schtick

go on. waste your time posting the evidence for them to ignore and 'pooh pooh'.

Originally posted by darthgoober
What kind of connections?

Um, he started 'Identity Evropa', a White Supremacist website. Is that enough or do you need further proof?

Originally posted by darthgoober
What kind of connections?

He was arrested for things like minor hate crimes, and was known as a friend among the Neo Nazi and KKK circles.

All that being said, I regret coming back into these debates... I simply do not have the energy for this sort of shit that I once did. My passion of it has dwindled in the face of..... other issues.

With that I shall bid thee good day.