Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst ...
2
3
4
5
6
... LastLast
  1. #61
    Immortal Zelk's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Newcastle Upon Tyne
    Posts
    7,145
    Boris criticises Russia but won't stop the selling of arms to a Saudi Government who is using said arms to destroy Yemen. The people in charge of our country have been the horrible knobs for decades now.

  2. #62
    Quote Originally Posted by Keeponrage View Post
    lol it is ur conspiracy shit. This video shows that they fire at "someone". Nowhere in this video it is shown that they are firing at unarmed civilians.
    It is confirmed that Ukranian policemen wounded and killed by gunfire. So they were shot at. At this situation they had all the right to shoot these who fires at them.

    Also, check this video. It is slow-mo. You can see that protesters are being shot in the back.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xnBa0Uj3Ijw

    There are more detailed analysis of this incident in the web. Conspiracy, my ass. Just fucking watch.
    There's video's clearly showing the police shooting weapons at the protestors, it's fine that you prefere to dismiss reality and jump into your little bubble of conspiracies, about civilian protestors shooting at themselves to make the cops look bad.

    And I gotta admit, I have no idea what a video of protestors beeing shot in the back would proof anyhow, is it possible that the police by some magical means, mangaded to get behind the protestors, I know it sounds unreal and would completely defeat your wonderland conspiracy, but just imagine.

  3. #63
    Elemental Lord
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Wales, UK
    Posts
    8,527
    Quote Originally Posted by Keeponrage View Post
    Also, check this video. It is slow-mo. You can see that protesters are being shot in the back.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xnBa0Uj3Ijw

    There are more detailed analysis of this incident in the web. Conspiracy, my ass. Just ****ing watch.
    Damn, I hadn't seen that before, if you pause it at 0:59 you can see the bullet could only have come from behind because of it's trajectory, if it came from the front it would have been fired from under the ground.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Zelk View Post
    Boris criticises Russia but won't stop the selling of arms to a Saudi Government who is using said arms to destroy Yemen. The people in charge of our country have been the horrible knobs for decades now.
    Saudi need a strong supply of weapons to replace the ones they give to extremists in Syria.

  4. #64
    Quote Originally Posted by caervek View Post
    Actually it's one of the most commonly used form of argument on pretty much any subject.
    Being commonly used does not change the fact that it is a form of derailment.

  5. #65
    Scarab Lord downnola's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Made in Philly, living in Akron.
    Posts
    4,572
    Quote Originally Posted by caervek View Post
    Don't worry buddy I laugh when I think of some of your arguments too. That one about the facts about a UK decision being wrong because you had a different opinion was classic.
    We both know what your original argument, and the argument used by your own parliament was. It's bad enough that you refuse to see your own contradiction, but you insisted that I wasn't following the discussion when it's clear you're weren't even aware of things you said on the same day in the same thread. Tell yourself whatever you need to If it helps you sleep at night. I think it's sad you'd rather play games than have a proper discussion.



    It's practically the polar opposite of a non-sequitur, a non-sequitur is "a conclusion or statement that does not logically follow from the previous argument or statement", whataboutism is the opposite, it uses logic to highlight a double standard and hypocrisy.
    Lol, it uses logic alright. The question is if the logic it uses is valid. It clearly is not.




    Actually it's one of the most commonly used form of argument on pretty much any subject.
    Re-read what I said and explain to me how my words imply that it isn't a common form argument on other subjects. We're talking about something separate from Syria and your using misdirection tactics. Come on, dude.

  6. #66
    Quote Originally Posted by Crispin View Post
    There's video's clearly showing the police shooting weapons at the protestors, it's fine that you prefere to dismiss reality and jump into your little bubble of conspiracies, about civilian protestors shooting at themselves to make the cops look bad.
    It shows police firing at someone. It doesn't show that they are firing at UNARMED civilians. If "civilians" are armed and pose a threat to the cops - they can shot at them. Lol, in USA cops shoot people even if they don't have arms, but pose a threat to a policemen. Here you got a mad crowd rushing at you with some of them armed and shooting at you.

    And I gotta admit, I have no idea what a video of protestors beeing shot in the back would proof anyhow, is it possible that the police by some magical means, mangaded to get behind the protestors, I know it sounds unreal and would completely defeat your wonderland conspiracy, but just imagine.
    buildings behind them were controlled by maidanites for a few days already. While it is still hypothetically possible, that some policemen got there - the are no proofs of this. Like absolutely. So, it is still unproved that policemen killed UNARMED civilians.

  7. #67
    Scarab Lord downnola's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Made in Philly, living in Akron.
    Posts
    4,572
    Quote Originally Posted by Keeponrage View Post
    So, it is still unproved that policemen killed UNARMED civilians.
    I think it's completely reasonable to take people who deny evidence from first hand accounts, photo and video evidence, human rights monitors, and multiple government intelligence agencies and file them in the "People who don't deserve to be taken seriously" bin.

  8. #68
    Elemental Lord
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Wales, UK
    Posts
    8,527
    Quote Originally Posted by downnola View Post
    It's bad enough that you refuse to see your own contradiction, but you insisted that I wasn't following the discussion
    That would be because you walked into a thread after a few days of absence and replied to the last post with a bunch of irrelevance because you didn't know what was being discussed.


    Quote Originally Posted by downnola View Post
    Lol, it uses logic alright. The question is if the logic it uses is valid.
    Indeed and ofc it is, the reason it works so well is because in essence it uses childrens level logic. Either the argument it is used against is valid in which case the whataboutism is easily defeated, or the initial argument is flawed in which case it is impossible to properly defend.

    Two examples:

    "you can't have an ice cream"
    "You let her have an ice cream so I should have one too!"
    "she got one because she tidied her room, you didn't!"
    Result: Argument defeated.

    "you're using cluster bombs! that's wrong!"
    "but you used white phosphorus last week!"
    "er, yeah, but, you're just using whataboutism!"
    Result: Unable to defeat argument so cry about it.

    Generally when somebody cries about whataboutism it's because they are falling victim to one of the most common forms of argument and cannot think of a way to counter it.

  9. #69
    Quote Originally Posted by downnola View Post
    I think it's completely reasonable to take people who deny evidence from first hand accounts, photo and video evidence, human rights monitors, and multiple government intelligence agencies and file them in the "People who don't deserve to be taken seriously" bin.
    It's the Russian strategy of "theres no gopro video on a bullit beeing shot by the riot police hitting an unarmed protestor from the front, so the protestors were shooting themselves!" Absolute denial, it's sad and amusing to watch.

    I'll follow the same thought, and deny the west is arming anyone in Syria, neither were it the west who bombed the syria soldiers, it was the russians, anyone saying otherwise can link a video of an american showing his passport, before he hands over weapons to Syrians, and a video showing western jets firing at the syrian army, gl.

  10. #70
    Elemental Lord
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Wales, UK
    Posts
    8,527
    Quote Originally Posted by Crispin View Post
    It's the Russian strategy of "theres no gopro video on a bullit beeing shot by the riot police hitting an unarmed protestor from the front, so the protestors were shooting themselves!" Absolute denial, it's sad and amusing to watch.
    It doesn't really have anything to do with nationality I don't think. There are thousands of Americans/Europeans who believe that man has never left the planets atmosphere and that 9/11 was conducted by lizardmen using mind control (or something like that, I'm really interested in conspiracy theories).

  11. #71
    Quote Originally Posted by Crispin View Post
    It's the Russian strategy of "theres no gopro video on a bullit beeing shot by the riot police hitting an unarmed protestor from the front, so the protestors were shooting themselves!" Absolute denial, it's sad and amusing to watch..
    Can police shoot at armed people that pose a threat to them or not? Stop twerking with irrelevant exaggerations and answer.

  12. #72
    Elemental Lord
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Wales, UK
    Posts
    8,527
    Quote Originally Posted by Keeponrage View Post
    Can police shoot at armed people that pose a threat to them or not? Stop twerking with irrelevant exaggerations and answer.
    What threat does a person sat on the floor holding a shield pose? You think they were planning to wait until winter and use the shield to sled along a rooftop and crush somebody?

  13. #73
    Quote Originally Posted by caervek View Post
    What threat does a person sat on the floor holding a shield pose? You think they were planning to wait until winter and use the shield to sled along a rooftop and crush somebody?
    These guys were shot from behind. There is still no proof that police shot them. Hell, there is even a BBC report about them, though in the end they try to spin in like these were Russian snipers. Had a good laugh at the moment when they interview one of the maidan organizers - Svoboda neonazi Parubiy, who is currently a Speaker in Ukranian Parliament, for a "proof".

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mJhJ6hks0Jg

    In fact, its showing. Even Western propaganda machine can't deny that policemen and protesters were shot by a third party. The only they can now do is to finger-point at Russia, by interviewing maidan nazi organizers and a shadowy silhouettes.
    Last edited by Keeponrage; 2016-10-12 at 02:24 PM.

  14. #74
    Scarab Lord downnola's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Made in Philly, living in Akron.
    Posts
    4,572
    Quote Originally Posted by caervek View Post

    "you're using cluster bombs! that's wrong!"
    "but you used white phosphorus last week!"
    "er, yeah, but, you're just using whataboutism!"
    Result: Unable to defeat argument so cry about it.

    Generally when somebody cries about whataboutism it's because they are falling victim to one of the most common forms of argument and cannot think of a way to counter it.
    Replying with "well you did x" doesn't disprove your opponents argument, nor does it mean what they say has no merit. They very well could be a hypocrite, but even a hypocrite can be right at times.

    For example, let's say I misspell a word and you point it out to me in your next response; would I win the argument if I replied that you misspelled a word a few posts ago? That doesn't change the fact that I misspelled a word, or prove that we shouldn't value spelling words correctly.

    Whataboutism is an evasion tactic that completely ignores a person's point and proves fuckall.

  15. #75
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Crispin View Post
    Unlike you, I do not see beeing elected gives you the right to let the police shoot at the citizens.
    Wait what? - The state has the authority to maintain law and order.

  16. #76
    Scarab Lord downnola's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Made in Philly, living in Akron.
    Posts
    4,572
    Quote Originally Posted by GoblinP View Post
    Wait what? - The state has the authority to maintain law and order.
    Murdering unarmed peaceful protesters is not mantaining law and order.

  17. #77
    Quote Originally Posted by Keeponrage View Post
    Can police shoot at armed people that pose a threat to them or not? Stop twerking with irrelevant exaggerations and answer.
    What armed people? Show me a video of the protestors shooting first.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by GoblinP View Post
    Wait what? - The state has the authority to maintain law and order.
    Pretty far fetched there.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Keeponrage View Post
    These guys were shot from behind. There is still no proof that police shot them. Hell, there is even a BBC report about them, though in the end they try to spin in like these were Russian snipers. Had a good laugh at the moment when they interview one of the maidan organizers - Svoboda neonazi Parubiy, who is currently a Speaker in Ukranian Parliament, for a "proof".

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mJhJ6hks0Jg

    In fact, its showing. Even Western propaganda machine can't deny that policemen and protesters were shot by a third party. The only they can now do is to finger-point at Russia, by interviewing maidan nazi organizers and a shadowy silhouettes.
    Geesh you've gone all in on the Russia propaganda havent you, cry all you want, what happened is obvious to everyone else.

  18. #78
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by downnola View Post
    Murdering unarmed peaceful protesters is not mantaining law and order.
    Using force to disperse disorderly mobs is.

  19. #79
    Quote Originally Posted by GoblinP View Post
    Using force to disperse disorderly mobs is.
    In what civilized country is it ok for the police to shoot into masses of unarmed protesters?

  20. #80
    The Unstoppable Force May90's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Somewhere special
    Posts
    21,699
    Quote Originally Posted by Kangodo View Post
    "Let's accuse other countries of warcrimes so everyone ignores the fact we voted against a new ceasefire after our allies ended the last one."
    1 comment in, and already whataboutism... *sighs*
    Quote Originally Posted by King Candy View Post
    I can't explain it because I'm an idiot, and I have to live with that post for the rest of my life. Better to just smile and back away slowly. Ignore it so that it can go away.
    Thanks for the avatar goes to Carbot Animations and Sy.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •