The Biden-Harris administration will say they are troubled and then provide $3 billion more to Israel.

How dare I notice an inconsistency!

Hmm how often do you inappropriately tell people to not be victims? That’s definitely a far-right turn of phrase.

“Don’t like far-right policies? You’ve already lost the argument, for I have depicted you as the soyjack”

It sounds like you aren’t in a place to decide whether to engage or not, and aren’t asking for help, so I will assist you by ignoring the replies you make for the next day or two.

If, after that, you would like to have a good faith engagement, I’d be happy to do so.

You say you don’t want to engage, but you keep replying. Can I help you with this is any way?

If you don’t want to engage, then you should probably stop replying.

?

They didn’t mention it so why would I address it? You don’t seem particularly ready to have a good faith discussion, either.

Please engage in good faith

Please try to engage in good faith.

None of my answers were random, they were direct responses to what you said, complete with quotes so that you can follow the logic.

Let me know when you are ready to engage with what I’ve said.

Please address what I actually say rather than namecalling and making things up.

Please engage with what I said rather than leveling personal attacks.

I think I handled very well.

One user asked you to provide any source material since 2022. As an answer, you provided (seemingly) 3 links, none of which were source material for the claim since 2022.

When this was pointed out, rather than engage with these failures, you just posted 5 links.

A different user replied to you to point out that all of the sourcing in those articles goes back to a particularly absurd fraud named Adrian Zenz. I’ll add that the sourcing is also pre-2022, but the user responding to you wrote several paragraphs critical of Zenz and why you should be skeptical. You did not respond to this person at all despite replying to others later.

The user from before responded by immediately pointing out that your links, yet again, did not include sourcing since 2022. They then went through each link to explained how this was the case.

Your response to this: “I did learn something. You have a movable goal post. On that note, I’m out. Peace be with you”. That’s it. That’s all you wrote.

What I just described is you displaying a series of bad faith behaviors. And then you came over here to complain Lmao.

Lol your copy pasted “answer”

Copy pasted? From where?

sounded like Donald Trump tried to wriggle out of a tough question.

How so? I’m starting to think you’ve never heard Trump speak.

You showed that you don’t accept the Tianmen square massacre

It is historical consensus that there was no massacre at Tiananmen Square and it is revisionist to suggest otherwise, so yes. I stated this very directly.

nor the Uyghur massacr

“the Uyghur massacre”, as a term, isn’t a thing. Nobody claims there is something called “The Uyghur Massacre” except you, just now. I don’t want to guess what you’re trying to communicate.

What’s next, denying the holocaust?

Exactly the opposite. The absurdities behind labeling China’s treatment of Uyghurs a genocide, which is the thing I’m actually talking about, is so careless that it has the effect of undermining the gravity and crime of actual genocides, including the Holocaust. Have you looked into the topics and groups I mentioned?

I.e. you want to shift the conversion to simplistic claims you feel more comfortable with rather than discuss what I have actually said.

Please engage in good faith.

What did I say that was inaccurate?

Thanks for posting your thoughts, I don’t get many opportunities to hear tankie brainrot as it’s often purged from my feed before I even open the comments.

I can see already how much of a good faith engagement this will be. Would you be surprised if people reacted negatively to your introduction?

#1 whatever did or did not happen at the specific location of Tiananmen Square doesn’t address that the Chinese government murdered student protestors.

What I was doing was pointing out that the most common understanding is an absurdity and historically revisionist. There is plenty more that could be discussed if one wanted to, but the common understanding is a cartoonish falsehood based on memes and not any actual attempt to read and understand. The way that parent made their reference indicated that they shared this false understanding.

Doesn’t matter if it was two blocks over or on the other side of the country. The CCP will use lethal force against protestors.

What matters re: the point I made is that there is a conflict with the common mental image and suggests that perhaps a person should recognize when they do not really know something. It might even jostle a person to not reach for the next-worst type of sourcing and instead do a deep-dive that challenges themselves. Wouldn’t want to get caught out like that again, right?

#2 a think tank has nothing to do with all the Uyghurs whose family members have disappeared without a trace.

This is the same illogical structue of the previous response. It sounds like what you would really like to say is that there is something related that you think is important so you would like to skip over what I said. Feel free to make another thread with these other points and I can respond to them there.

You’re quibbling over minor specifics and ignoring the undisputed parts that are most damning.

Ad I said, the entire narrative shift is based on an absurd propaganda apparatus and not any evidence on the ground. The use of the big G word.

The fact that OP is repeating this again suggests a lack of investigation. And yet they are so dismissive! I would hope that they might become interested in doing some media criticism. Maybe ask a question. Sometimes people do this and only tell you until much later.

Stop being a propagandist for a government that doesn’t even align with your proported beliefs just because ”america bad".

Now you are just making things up.

Based on the link another user had to provide, you received a lengthy criticism of your logic and sources and then didn’t handle it well.

Now you are here calling them crazy.