new | show | ask | jobs Github

luma 2 days ago

That is a preposterous claim, but maybe you're being sincere. If so, can you provide an example?

▲

frumplestlatz 2 days ago | parent [-]

[flagged]

▲

asib 2 days ago | parent [-]

You're appealing to another proscription decision that is extraordinarily controversial.

▲

frumplestlatz 2 days ago | parent [-]

Controversial -- particularly amongst those of a particular political persuasion that supports a terrorist state -- doesn’t mean preposterous.

▲

asib 12 hours ago | parent | next [-]

It doesn't mean preposterous or not preposterous. It does mean there is general dispute regarding the proscription.

Appealing to it is not really progressing your argument. Both decisions are controversial, you don't make a more convincing argument as to why one controversial decision should not be considered controversial, by pointing to a different, also controversial, decision.

▲

inigyou 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

We get it - everyone you disagree with is a terrorist. You can stop commenting now.

	▲	frumplestlatz 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		That's a deeply flawed reading of what I've written. For example, you've disagreed with me in a way that leads me to believe you're more than a little bit dense, but not a terrorist.