I don't lie and deny facts
This is the crux of the issue, which is why I bring up epistemology while you keep turning the discussion to victimhood and your emotions. I'm not claiming you are lying or denying facts, I'm claiming you're passing along conjecture as fact.
How do you know the things you claim to know about Soros? The article titled "Yes, George Soros Sent Money to Fund the Riots—and So Did Taxpayers" connects dots from Soros through a philanthropic organization or two, but within the body of the article the chain of evidence stops there. It's a couple of steps further to "the rioters" and the article only offers conjecture and inference.
ISPs and package delivery services face their greatest challenges and costs in "the last mile." This is where the "Soros funds and organizes the riots" argument fails in my view. Elsewhere I've seen generous amounts claimed to be paid to rioters for various acts, including a five figure sum for torching a building. Nobody has shown proof of a single dime being disbursed from the Soros-funded groups to the rioters. This is your last-mile challenge remaining for you to prove.Read More
@tb87670 The lightswitch effect is greatly amplified in BPD women. Of all such women I've known personally and heard about anecdotally, one of the across the board commonalities these women shared was referring to their most recent ex as a piece of shit.
Surely an opposing ideology is enough to join the dots.
You can reject that as the pure conjecture it is, or you can allow it within your worldview so long as it appears to attack other sportsball team, which puts you on the same intellectual footing as those who assert things like:
Driven by a biological analysis of women as fundamentally inferior to men, male supremacists malign women specifically for their gender. A thinly veiled desire for the domination of women and a conviction that the current system oppresses men in favor of women are the unifying tenets of the male supremacist worldview.
@tb87670 The PJMedia writer is shilling a book. Is this an article or advertorial?
Both sources presented a lot of data points or dots, but neither connected the dots in an unbroken causal chain from Soros to rioters. That trail goes cold right there within the articles themselves. Both articles make "connections" and inferences that play well to a "Soros Bad" audience but the conclusions they try to sell do not stand up well to skepticism or scrutiny.
@tb87670 Oh hey, a whole gunny sack of allegations and complaints from the past completely unrelated to the question at hand, with some ad hominem toward the party asking for proof. This is exactly the way women behave in an argument when asked to prove her original claim or complaint.
A claim was made that current looters and rioters are being funded by Soros, but neither the claimant nor others chiming in against Soros have presented direct proof, or even a preponderance of evidence.
Hopefully soon you'll realize I'm not advocating for Soros, but rather for Red Pill men to hold themselves accountable to the claims they make.
@destraht "Soros's NGO's brag about the money that they move around in the name of their cause. In the West his orgs get a free pass on the scrutiny of that mission."
Newt Gingrich brought up Soros on Fox... yesterday? and their hosts got very awkward all of the sudden. Something's up over at Fox if even they won't call a spade a spade. We know they've been sliding left the past couple of years, but to see their hosts live on air react like that was very telling.