Texas: black Thug Murders White Cop. #BlueLivesMatter.

You can't even get the races right in your racialist post?

Color me surprised.

 

Why did you make up the thing about his killer being black? Looks like you care about something other than the victim's life. Big surprise.

 

It was an syntactical error. It was a brown thug that murdered this White cop, not a black one. Distinction without a difference for the purposes of this thread, however.

 

So it made it into your thread title. It made it into your first post. You clearly just made it up. That isn't a "syntactical error." It was clearly just race baiting. If the distinction didn't matter, you wouldn't have made it part of the topic title and the OP. Why did you make it up?

If you actually cared about the life of the victim, you wouldn't have made up race baiting bull **** to capitalize on his death for your political racial identity purposes. I'm sorry, but you obviously couldn't give less of a **** about his life. You only care about how you can use it for your rhetorical race war.

 

After reading the news story that comprised the source of my OP in its entirety, I knew the suspect wasn't White. You're right, the suspect turned out to be brown -- and the person who proffered this fact had to dog for it -- but still a distinction without a difference in the context of the thread.

Fallacy. Argumentum ad hominem. I am not the topic of this thread. A factual rebuttal addressing the topic would better support your "argument."

 

If it were a distinction without a difference, why did you consider the (false) distinction to be important enough to include in your thread title and in your OP? And the article you link to doesn't even identify the suspect as non-white. Do you expect us to be dumb enough to think you are completely unaware that there have been white people who have attacked white cops? Bull ****.

All you knew was that a white cop was dead. So you made up **** about the attacker being black to suit your rhetorical race war.

 

Which is how I knew the suspect wasn't White. Hence the thread. I think you finally figured it out. By accident though it may be...

Completely irrelevant to the topic. Please try to keep up.

 

All I knew after reading the story in its entirety is that the murderer of the cop was not White. And I am not wrong. The question you need to be asking yourself is how I knew this... How did I know the race of the cop-killing thug when the news story didn't even mention it? Hint: I just answered the question for you.

 

If I was black, I’d have a huge problem with black people perpetuating their own negative stereotypes and fostering racism against them as a result. The last thing I would do is march to defend the criminal scum of my race and try to get them a free ride.

but then, obviously, I don’t think like black people apparently do

 

This case has nothing to do with black people. Why make it about them?

 

Now you're getting it! Well done!

 

I got there a while back. You made up **** to try to make this about black people. Then you got caught. Now you are trying to find a way to pivot. You were the one who made this about black people, despite no black person being involved. Come to terms with your race baiting manipulations.

 

Oh I guesd I jumped the gun crediting you with understanding the topic. My bad.

Wrong. My position has been consistent since the OP.

For about the seventh time, this thread has nothing to do with black people - you yourself acknowledged this above.

Fallacy. Argumentum ad hominem. I am not the topic of this thread. A factual rebuttal addressing the topic would better support your argument.

 

If this thread had nothing to do with black people, why did you put "black" (incorrectly) in your title and in the OP?

The claim you made in your OP has already been debunked. The thing that you claimed happen didn't happen. If we aren't supposed to discuss your thread in this thread, then what are we supposed to discuss? We both know you can't answer and will, again, desperately scramble to pivot.

I've already factually rebutted your topic. The "facts" in your topic title and OP are your invention and are not actually facts. The end.

 

I've kind of lost faith in your estimations of accuracy throughout this thread.

Really you should do better than this.

 

It is called a literary device. I recognize this may be beyond your comprehension.

We could actually discuss the topic. I shouldn't have to explain to you what it is. But then again, given yoir demonstrated lack of capacity to understand complex topics, I suppose I could were I feeling charitable.

You can make all the claims you want, but that does not change your continued deployment of logical fallacies.

Back on topic: I claimed the worthless thug who murdered the White cop was not White and I was correct. How did I know I was right even though the news story did not reference the race of the suspect?

Answer this and we can continue this discussion. Proffer another off-topic rant or ad hom fallscy and we are done, I will revoke your privilege to continue engaging in substantive dialog with me. Choice is yours...

 

Fallacy. Argumentum ad hominem. I am not the topic of this thread. A factual rebuttal addressing the topic would better support your argument.

 

Factual inaccuracy and making up bull **** are not "literary devices."

Your topic is literally false. Your claims are objectively false.

You literally made up fake bull ****.

No, you claimed he was black. And you had no information about his race when you made this **** up in the first place.

Pointing out that you are wrong isn't an "ad hom." I can provide some tutoring links if necessary. But thank you for signaling that you are preparing to flee after being proven wrong.

 

Pointing out that someone is wrong isn't an "ad hominem." You were factually incorrect. Any adult should be able to come to terms with that.

 

As promised... Your privilege is revoked. Please refrain from further posts in this thread.

 

Please refrain from basing your threads on blatantly, objectively false narratives. And quit complaining when people acknowledge the truth, as opposed to your objectively false narrative. Too much to deal with? Cool. I have a feeling you will prove that's the case in your next post.

 

Oh is that what that is? Let's remember that next time CNN says some blatantly wrong ****, and ignore that and simply address what their "point" was as though they got their facts right shall we?

 

Yes, that's what it is. Instead of a factual rebuttal addressing the topic, you deployed the time-honored logical fallacy. IOW, you actually made no point of factual relevance to any argument you may have been trying to proffer.

 

We've tried addressing the facts. You keep claiming that the facts don't matter.

 

Meh just forget it.. Hey you remember when that racist white hillbilly DC sniper shot all those people? Freakin white people I tell you.