Moonbox

Nope. What I said was pretty clear. You look really silly trying to discredit all of the media, aid/human rights groups, governments etc from around the world as compromised and biased against Israel, when your evidence for that is citing Israeli-funded propaganda. 🙃

Yeah that's all they were doing...🤡

My point was that Canada has a larger political and social/cultural problems when it comes to the economy. The Liberals are not entirely to blame given it started under the Conservatives and has continued for ~40 years, it's also hard to understate how poorly of a job Justin did both nominally and relatively speaking. Everyone experienced COVID. Canada's economy came out particularly sluggishly.

Contrasted against the McGuinty/Wynne Liberals, that's high praise for Dofo! Sometimes all you have to do is not completely sh*t yourself to be better than the alternative. (See: 2025 Federal Election)

This logic operates on the assumption that all of the various global organizations, non-government or otherwise, are compromised and biased against Israel for "reasons", but that these "ngo-monitor" links you're tossing around here are fair and neutral, despite being funded directly by Israel. Awkward.

Canada 2015: https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/countries/can/canada/gdp-per-capita USA 2015: https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/countries/usa/united-states/gdp-per-capita 😑 Canada has lagged behind the USA since the 1980's. It definitely got a lot worse under Trudeau though.

There is no doubt some of that. Hamas will, of course, do anything they can to make Israel look as bad as they can. When the data/images/stories are coming from American and western doctors, aid agencies etc, it's a bit more credible, would you not agree?

Lots of men? Are we supposing that the men are hoarding all of the food at the expense of their children or something? Did you know that, physiologically, children starve much faster and much easier than adults, and that's why it's always the children starving first?

I guess the question first should be what would a source look like that you'd actually believe and not dismiss outright?

He's not much of a thinker. He's just a follower. Whatever his social media or "conservative" news feed is telling him about something is exactly what his opinion on it will be, and any "research" he does on it will simply be to echo and confirm that, rather than inform himself. If he devoted even 1% of the energy he spends ranting and venting his emotions on actually double-checking his work, his sources and considering contradicting information, he might actually learn something from time to time. Instead, he's proudly proclaimed that he won't do this, not realizing how foolish it makes him look. It's why he regularly gets caught mis-citing articles, posting garbage or gets bamboozled by AI-generated slop. If you devote 100% skepticism to anything that contradicts your worldview, and 0% skepticism to anything that confirms it, you too could live in a comfy bubble like Army Guy. That's why he and the little angry no-life are such pals now. Fox's 24/7 spazzing is justified by the fact that Army Guy gets some emotional support and validation. 🥰

It's neither the norm nor the exception. You'll never get everything you want out of a government or a candidate, so you're always just balancing good vs bad. That's just democracy, and it's not why we're seeing so much polarization.

The number of times I've seen you begin a debate with an accusation of lying is a good start. Your circular performances where you invent dumb strawmen to argue against, then refuse to move on when your opponent refuses adopt your fabrication as their point, leading you to further accusations of lying is my favorite. The "I call out lying when people are lying", or "I point out people are running away when they are running away" is another spectacular example of self-affirming, circular reasoning. This comment would hold more water if you were actually making logical, fact-based arguments, rather than waving your hands around and nattering vaguely about "context" whilst accusing people of bigotry. 🙃

This is a pretty good summary of your childish and simplistic worldview, and it's why so many people here laugh at your clueless hot-takes and uninformed opinions. Your reasoning skills and ability to debate begins and ends with "the left BAD". 🤡

Or maybe...just maybe...they think it's a waste of time debating with you, because you're not even a remotely reasonable person. 🙃

The number of times I've come across you telling people they're running away from you on this forum is weird. These sort of self-serving delusions don't impress anyone but yourself. So simple you won't (can't) bother. 🙄 "THAT'S RACIST!" isn't much of an argument I'm afraid, though it is funny.

Did you have another fruitful weekend of fighting on the internet with anyone who'd pay attention to you, no-life? As always, things aren't the way you say they are, just because you insist on it really really hard. 🤡

That's not what whatabout fallacy is at all. You're right that it's a stumping and frustrating for biblical purists, but that's because they never actually have an answer that doesn't undermine their dogmatic quoting from scripture. If any of it is subject to modern interpretation, then all of it is, which means it's far from the trump-card that Bible-thumpers wish it to be on matters of Rights and Law.

It's too bad that how you gauge sources, content. behavior and information is determined entirely by how much you agree with it, rather than how much it actually makes sense or whether it can be supported by fact. 🫠 The reality is that I do provide sources (and do so regularly) when I need to prove or disprove something. I also finished high school and understand the purpose of citation, which (contrary to you and Fox's understanding) is to quote and support specific claims rather than just dumping a link into the thread and then making up your own version of what it all means. "at least Fox provides sources," is funny shit though. All-day no-life trolling, according to Army Guy, is rationalized and excused because "at least he provides sources". By that criteria, here you go, this is your life on this board: https://thedecisionlab.com/biases/confirmation-bias Selective exposure, which refers to the filtering of information. Meaning that the individual avoids all challenging or contradictory information. Trolling is fine, if at least you provide "sources", right?!?

Taylor, I know that you read this forum. Please send me a signed copy of Blank Spaces (Vinyl). It's totally not for me. My niece is a big fan...

He filled my BINGO card AGAIN! 🤡

You're assuming that a comeback is required for anything you say. All of your posts are the same and interchangeable. They're just a stirred up salad of slogans, and pet-words/insults you repeat in different combinations and orders no matter who you're talking to. Commie commie Lieberal Marxist Globalist Fascists...🫠

I'm claiming that you made up something that you're now claiming Barq said. The thread's two pages. Here, I'll remind you what you came up with in that muddled little head of yours: That was 100% totally made-up, batshit fantasy on your part. As I said, you're too freaking dense to debate anyone here, so you retreat into fantasy land and invent imaginary positions and statements that nobody said and then debate against them yourself. Now that you've been called out on it for the thousandth time, there's only one way for this to go. You'll either scurry away and stop responding (very rare), or you'll rant and plead and insist over pages and pages of useless taunting and insults that your make-believe is in fact real, but you won't (can't) quote it because of....reasons. 🤣👌

Thanks for proving my point chucklef*ck. You shake your head around, jumble the words, and then spit them back out in a different order. The absurd stupidity of calling folks Fascists and Marxists at the same time is lost on you, but you're excellent comic relief here. Give your head another shake and give us the next arrangement. Can't wait. 😆

Let's see...I have Communist, Marxist, Globalist...Lieberal and...Yep, there it is! Carnage! That's another BINGO!!!

That's reasonable, but on this topic it's the proverbial "they" who apparently lied to you, and I don't think you could describe what sort of sources you would trust if they challenged and disproved what you've already chosen to believe. Could you?