Your edit demonstrates exactly what I mean by bad faith: you're intentionally itching for a fight in all your comments, you're not focused on conveying your points in a way that invites level-headed discourse.
Are things ok with you in general? Could there be some non-political reason why you're resorting to inflammatory techniques to get people to talk with you?
I mean I've been doxxed before several times for 'level-headed' discourse with various people on the internet. People make fun of Trump supporters far basically embracing all the various insults that get hurled at us, but I would venture the vast majority of us don't really care anymore. We're tired of it. If the level-headed discourse gets us violence, might as well just say what we really think.
As for my claims:
1. The United Nations bankrolled UNRWA and has for the last few decades, which has funneled money to Hamas. They have consistently voted against Israel, and they stood by silently in their peacekeeping missions in Lebanon and Gaza while Hamas, Gazans, and Hezbollah literally raped and massacred people on live TV. Yes, they need to go. They've not given us anything that American leadership has been unable to provide.
2. The election. The election turnouts between 2016 and 2024 are in line with each other but are extremely at odds with 2020. There was massive last-minute rule changes (like in PA) by executive action (which have now been undone by the supreme court). There were many instances of poll watchers being blocked (videos in fact) in 2020. Counting would suddenly stop and restart. Then there would be thousands of ballots in ballot dumps 100% for Biden. This is not normal. I have no hard evidence. I've freely admitted that elsewhere. But the totality of evidence points to some really fishy business going on here. I mean, Putin wins his elections too, and 'won' a referendum in Crimea.
I'm not sure what other takes are in bad faith, but as I've said many times, happy to discuss
So your answer to discourse getting out of hand in the past is to take an approach that starts it out of hand, seems counterproductive no?
Although now that you're presenting those takes with some more surface area, the rationale doesn't feel all there.
After all, for how massive the UN is and its mandate, I don't think the UNRWA or ill equipped peacekeeping forces avoiding entering a full blown engagement justifies the extraordinary claim they're actually a terrorist organization.
And the voter fraud rationale is similarly light: most of what you mentioned was covered in numerous lawsuits, and the vast majority were lost or dismissed. The remaining few don't account for any significant gap in the election process. Is there a case that would have materially affected the outcome of the election that wasn't dismissed or lost?
> After all, for how massive the UN is and its mandate, I don't think the UNRWA or ill equipped peacekeeping forces avoiding entering a full blown engagement justifies the extraordinary claim they're actually a terrorist organization.
They're either a terrorist organization or useless. Either way, the need to be disbanded and investigated. They should not be able to hide in the USA under the guise of diplomatic immunity. They are not a state.
> Is there a case that would have materially affected the outcome of the election that wasn't dismissed or lost?
No but that never happened with Kennedy/Nixon either. American history is weird. No court is going to touch an election. Why would they. It's national suicide.
Are things ok with you in general? Could there be some non-political reason why you're resorting to inflammatory techniques to get people to talk with you?