stephen01king

Try asking the guy to criticise Israel for all the civilians they’ve killed and you may find that it’s actually not that easy, which is strange, right?

Dang, they’ve really been preparing for this for a while, haven’t they. A lot more than I can say for the Trump administration.

Checking if the person I’m accusing of being a leftist is a leftist first before posting the comment is not pretending to do research, it’s simply common sense.

You somehow think that making comments involves either peer-reviewed science or zero research at all and nothing in between. You also seem to be proud of not double-checking your assumptions at all. From these two observations, I can tell that you have a few issues up there that needs to be addressed.

No, I simply recognise what I perceive may not be the same as reality and would double check my assumptions before posting any comment so I do less mistakes. I especially do not proudly proclaim that my comments lack any research whatsoever and that I’m completely fine with it like you are doing.

So you’re making assumptions based on your flawed and biased experience instead of factual data. Got it. I expected that given the quality of comment you provided above.

I’m also amazed at how quickly you blame leftists based on one person’s comment that gave no indication that they are a leftist.

This comment is why I can’t take you at your word when you say you’re against all civilian deaths.

Not only do you not have any proof to give, which might be explainable by you not getting the chance to make such a comment just yet. But instead of simply explaining why and using this chance to call out Israel for their atrocities against civilians, you decided to focus on one part of the comment so you can avoid criticising Israel while claiming the moral high ground.

This is a very typical Zionist tactic which is convincing me more and more that you are not arguing in good faith. I can still be wrong, but you’re not making it easy for me to trust you.

And you’re making this assertion based on which data?

Do you classify them as an untrustworthy source when it doesn’t conform to your world view? I treat them as a source that I compare with other sources.

Do you know how polls are made? 500 people is enough to get an insight into the trends inside a population. There are other factors that affect the accuracy more than having more people surveyed. You’re free to analyze their methodology and come up with an argument for why it invalidates the result.

Like I said, they are more likely to have been Zionists than anti-Zionists, given the proof I’ve provided. Never did I claim they all are Zionists. I also never even claimed murdering civilians is a positive thing. All I did was disprove your claim that the anti-Zionists sentiment here are caused by antisemitism.

Also, you avoided giving proof that you had made comments calling out Israel for killing civilians in multiple countries when the other guy asked for it, so forgive me for doubting your position that you are against all civilian death. The way you argue are far too reminiscent to the way Zionists do for me to take your word for it.

There are polls showing the majority of Israelis consider themselves Zionists. For example.

I want to say you’re just uninformed, but I’m way too used to the way Zionists argue to recognise when they are just acting like they don’t know so they can make false arguments that aren’t based on any facts.

In this case, all the victims are disproportionately Zionists, so what you’re claiming is the less likely thing to be happening here. It’s also very transparent when Zionists try to hide behind the Jew identity so they can avoid consequences for their actions, you know?

In this specific conflict, one of them was not the aggressor, so I am still on their side within that specific context. They’re still a horrible regime, though.

Probably having thousands of Chrome tabs open.

Thank’s for the link. Probability and statistics in general is not intuitive to me, not just for this type.

Is 97% accuracy rate the same as a 3% false positive rate? It might be a combination of false positive and false negative rate.

Same energy as “if you don’t want to be poor, be rich”.

Are you using words without knowing its meaning?

Your name certainly doesn’t help for one of those accusation.

We’re asking what YOU define as communism.

Unfortunately they don’t explain what the attacks were in the article. Gonna need to find the paper to know.