I know you think repeating things I have posted to you in the past makes you look smart, frankly it is flattering, but it is also kind of sad. In order for you to sound smart repeating things back to me I have said to you, you might want to actually bother to understand them first. You will notice my reply is not even an attempt at a retort but predicting your reaction to a future event. Because of this, you will notice your whole linking of "The Hierarchy of Disagreement", while quite visually impressive, is totally irrelevant to my statement. You enjoy pretending to be smart if it makes you that happy. Who am I to get in your way?

Everyone else: I encourage you to continue the discussion here free of censorship.

Since bluefirecorp_ can't engage in an actual debate without being able silence ideas he disagrees with, I thought I would post my replies to comments here as he deleted them. Perhaps people can engage in an actual debate this way, and not just have some childish club where leftists stand around and reassure each other of their correctitude, normalizing increasingly erratic behavior. OP

I am sure you would prefer the whole internet be sanitized from ideas you dislike like they do on Facebook and Twitter, but most of us don't...

As I expected, you can't. Maybe you should learn what a source is, I will go back to grade school as soon as you get out of your jammies, make your lunch, and get in the car so I can drop you off there.

Well documented eh? Then you should have no problem producing any of them with sources should you? Please do. I am a state agent now eh? Shit, I haven't been getting my paychecks. Who do I contact to get my back pay? BTW its Tecshare, I know spelling words which are literally right in front of you is hard, but please try.

This is an interesting narrative. Funny when I go on youtube and put in the words "ANTIFA ATTACKS" I am treated to endless hours of footage of these leftist groups engaged in violence and general criminal activity. Some how I can't seem to find the same for this invisible scourge of this right wing terrorist uprising. Just a week ago some one who was a self proclaimed member of ANTIFA armed with a rifle attacked an ICE facility with maltov cocktails before being shot to death. How long ago was that fake bomb guy and you are still screaming from the mountain tops about it? Leftist violence is regular, full of actual injuries, and under reported. "right wing" violence is sporadic, blown out of proportion, and over reported. Leftist violence has been a regular occurrence since at least 2016. If you are against political violence just perhaps we should look at groups like ANTIFA which actively and openly are engaged in criminal activity, assaults, attempted murders, attacks on government facilities, etc. Nah, lets ignore that because they found some wing bat who didn't injure anyone a year ago with a Trump hat.

Is everyone seeing the pattern of how he is taking basically every statement I make, turning it into the most extreme or absolutist form of it he interprets, then applying it to me as if I should defend his interpretation of it? This is also known as a straw man logical fallacy. You don't have to be goth to be dressed in black, no, but are you going to tell me you regularly see groups of 4-5 men all dressed in black walking in single file lines casually in your daily life? The point is it is odd and you are trying to pretend it is totally normal with zero explanation other than the witnesses imagined everything.

Yes, the woman in the parking lot, two different witnesses, two different statements. The only person conflating the two is you. Again, you have no explanation for what an officer could possibly be shooting at from the parking lot when the source of fire was reportedly from the hotel hundreds of yards away from an elevated position. I never said it was "good evidence" of anything, simply contradictory evidence to the official narrative, among many contradictory bits of evidence in this case. Again, what is it about discussing these events and the conflicting information that upsets you so much you compulsively feel the need to end discussion about it? Cognitive dissonance much? Of course not, and everyone else is wrong for having discussions outside of the ideas you approve of. This is certainly not a symptom of you struggling with your own inability to integrate conflicting information and everything that implies.

"heart attack" along with "stroke" are among the more popular "natural" causes of death preferred by intelligence agencies because they are common and the cause not always easy to determine. I wouldn't be surprised if he was assassinated, he has been pissing in the face of pretty much everyone for a while now and has been a source of global instability.

Sorry, I didn't realize once you made a joke it is dead forever. Next time I will check with you first before laughing.

So your theory is they were a bunch of goths running in a group? One witness saw some one shooting, yes. As I already explained, the fire was coming from high up in the hotel. Your claim is it was a cop the witness saw. What was the cop firing at if the fire was hundreds of yards away from an unidentified elevated position? Police aren't allowed to fire on a target they can't identify for safety and liability reasons. Once again, two guys plotting to rob a 7-11 is a conspiracy. It is a legal terminology, and conspiracies happen every day. Weak minded people like you who rage out over anyone even having a discussion of alternative narratives LOVE to use that word as a cudgel in an attempt to dismiss anything that upsets their sensitive state and give them a bad case of cognitive dissonance. Just perhaps, the problem is internal.

More Flying Hellfish doing the will of his Marxist buddies as he ignores any reports I make...

From the statement in the OP "When she reached the parking lot, she saw a person whom she did not believe was an officer with an automatic powered rifle firing his gun".

From the statement in the link: "We ran through a back door and as we turned to the right, we saw about 4-5 that looked middle-eastern men walking in a single file line dressed in all black + last person in the back had a shoulder strap on AR-15."

Seems like an oddly specific thing to hallucinate a specific type of rifle, and 4 to 5 men dressed in black. Also if some one is shooting it is a pretty clear thing too. Police wouldn't have been firing return fire up into the hotel because it would be unsafe. Besides, my "REKT" was bigger and redder than yours so I win by default anyway.

The violence may have been staged. I know for a fact the US government has been using the "black bloc" as a way to cause enough damage to shut down legitimate peaceful protests. This eventually evolved into basically ANTIFA branches where the same tactic is used. They are allowed to cause enough damage and assault uninterrupted so the police, administration, etc can justify shutting any legitimate protest they choose. You will notice the take over of the government building recently was exceptionally organized, and the ones involved all seemed to have surgical masks on. Of course a legitimate protester has good reason to not want to be identified for protesting, but this is also abused by government proxies.

"Redddit Just Exposed the Entire Hong Kong Government"

https://www.youtube.com/embed/P_9ualy9x6U

"Bernie Sanders Proves Minimum Wage Critics Right In Latest Response to $15 Fiasco"

https://pjmedia.com/trending/bernie-sanders-proves-minimum-wage-critics-right-in-latest-response-to-15-fiasco/

Well then if you are implying you don't care about maintaining any reputation here, why does my criticism of your use of the trust system bother you so much?

So they need to be shooting to operate as a group? What? If this evidence is so meaningless, tell me, why is the fact that it is simply being discussed clearly upset you so much?
REKT!

Once again you conflate illegal immigration with all immigration. They are not the same thing. Furthermore The USA already takes in more immigrants than anywhere on Earth.






I never said anything about a budget. I said resources were already stretched thin. Money is not the same thing as resources, but I wouldn't expect a Marxist to understand this very simple reality of economics. There is no "both ways", you are arguing a different subject, not the premise of the subject of the thread. Once again, this is a non-sequitur logical fallacy. I don't have to defend myself against your argument because it is not based on the premise. All you are doing is telling me more theoretical ways you imagine things could work, not how they do work. I tell you we only have enough oranges on the tree to feed a classroom. You proceed to tell me that we could have enough oranges for the school if the 10 apples trees next to it were actually orange trees. None of your fantasizing makes more oranges exist.

You are arguing from a position of ethics now? I think what you mean is you are arguing from a position of pathos. Some people don't have enough to eat, that is bad and makes me feel bad, therefore everyone should have a right to eat as much as they want! This doesn't make any more oranges either. You just declaring it a right doesn't fill people's bellies. Building and maintaining an infrastructure that rewards farmers as well as serves consumers does. Your imagination doesn't feed anyone. You don't hold some new evolved more empathetic ideology than everyone else, you are just too ignorant to realize that just because you feel passionately about a subject doesn't fix the logistical issues with the solution that makes you feel good in your tum tum with the least amount of effort. In short you want to give lip service for these disenfranchised people, but only so much as it serves your narcissism, not to the point where you might actually have to live in the real world and draw a line where sacrifices are made in order to at least keep SOME of the people well cared for. What your plan results in is absolutely equality. Equality in poverty, ignorance, and squalor.


"You want to pick and choose that property rights are something people are entitled to while rights I advocate for are taking property from someone else.  Again, you are playing both sides and contradicting yourself.  The paradox is if people aren't entitled to property then how could any right entitle someone to someone else's property? The answer is that you believe people are entitled to the property they occupy and nothing else.    The concept of property ownership implies that some-people have an entitlement to property."

This is quite a trapeze act of semantic gymnastics. I am not "playing both sides" or "contradicting" myself, you are. This whole statement is a word salad inversion designed to confuse who is arguing what so you can some how snatch a sophistic win out of the jaws of logical defeat. The only property rights people are entitled to is those they either created via the fruits of their own labor, or that that they voluntarily contracted with another party to obtain. What you are conflating these property rights with are inalienable rights such as the right to free speech, or the right to bear arms. Inalienable rights are restrictions upon government and other entities from taking those rights from you. They are not rights to the commodities and time of others. Your triple semantic back flip, while quite distracting, is still based in projection and general horse shit.

You believe that these Marxist ideologies are some how different because they have small nuanced differences. Unfortunately just because you hold this belief doesn't make it so. The fact is all of these branches of Marxism all share basic ideological foundations which have very clear, stated, and historical goals that have made themselves evident over and over and over again. The very core of Marxism itself is to constantly infiltrate and occupy other organizations to use them as ideological cover to acheive other unstated goals. This so called nuance you point to is simply evidence of how Marxism infiltrates different organizations, and hollows them out to displace it with its own ideology and acheive Marxist goals.

If more people = a bigger economy, why is it Africa is not an economic powerhouse? How is it Japan has such a massive economy with a comparatively much smaller population? Your premise is laughable.


"Since the genocide of native american cultures, the culture of the USA has been multiculturalism.  "

Actually the culture of the USA has historically been European and Christian. Multiculturalism only exists to the extent that people assimilate to AMERICAN culture, and that it has a system for integrating everyone. This assimilation process is key to that. What you are advocating is totally skipping that assimilation step and just letting other cultures flood in ant take over. All cultures are not equal. There is a reason so much of the world wants to come here, and that is worth protecting no matter how many times you call it racist bigot homophobic etc, because not protecting it means creating more suffering than you can imagine.

Oh, that's very generous of you to phase out the border in steps. This is why Marxism is shit, because it never ends. It is always just a progressive chipping away at the foundations of society all the while crying about how it is just a small compromise over and over and over thousands of times. You get the compromise you want then you move on to pushing it even further. This is why Marxists are inherently deceitful. They think they are lying to you for your own good. The border being a barrier to human movement is literally the most important reason for having a border. You really just got done chastising me over your projections upon me for "having it both ways" then you tell me you want a border, but not one that people are stopped from crossing? This kind of statement is what demonstrates to me that you are very clearly either exceptionally ignorant and unable to control your own mental processes, or you are exceptionally deceitful and actively lying. There is a legal process for crossing borders. People can visit most places freely, but not just stay wherever they like. You are conflating the two ideas. Also The United States not only shares a similar culture throughout it, but also a unified legal system. You are really stretching hard to justify a failing argument. Show me some more of your Grade A Pathos based Marxist sophistry monkey boy.

Literally no one said anything about makeup. Women already get shitloads of subsidies, largely paid for via men's tax dollars. If you continue this trend there will be no tax dollars because men will just "check out", as is already the current trend. Most men don't need a bunch of shit to live happy lives. Women however do about 70% of the purchasing of consumer products.

Asking to be removed from the default trust does not take away one's ability to use the trust system here, but this all needs to be applied in the context by which he not only asked to be removed, but what the rating itself is for. Does this rating actually serve the community or is it more likely Hhampuz is just agitated he had to lose income due to public pressure and is now lashing out at people he sees as easy targets? Do any of you honestly believe the rating he left is going to protect anyone? He asked to be removed from the default trust as soon as people started putting pressure on him due to his managing of the Livecoin signature campaign. These two events are not only clearly linked, but quite hypocritical as he by any standard served to lend Livecoin far more credibility than any signature holder.

Finally after shirking his public service in the form of the default trust under very modest criticism, he then again wants to take advantage of the trust system to sooth his butt hurt over the whole situation by over correcting in the other direction by being excessive with his ratings now. Free of the fear of public sanction of being removed from the default trust, he can use this to psychologically compensate for being coerced into take an action by public pressure to give him a sense of control. This all in context is quite contradictory and not honorable behavior.

As I said before Hhampuz, you are only hurting your own actual reputation, not in some ranking system, but with the actual people in the community through this kind of behavior. I am just one of the few people that will tell you to your face whether you want to hear it or not, the rest just quietly whisper it behind your back.

I didn't say there were few media reports, I said the media was QUICK to bury it. Quick is a measure of time, not quantity, therefore the fact that you saw "plenty of news about it" is irrelevant to my statement. Multiple witnesses reported this team of people operating as a group. Your quotes are just reiterations of your initial premise which I already addressed, twice.

BTW "REKT"? You mean like the last time you said I was "REKT" then ran away without a reply? What are you a hairless boy on CS GO? Are you going to scream you fucked my mom in a cracking voice now? Did you ever ask yourself why you are so upset over this discussion taking place? Great arguments again Captain Cognitive Dissonance.