Yes and thats part of the problem. You assume certain demographiscs with certain beliefs and positions. Classic IP.
Internet protocol? Intellectual property? Intelligent person?
What exactly about what I said was dogmatic.
Good grief. What wasn't?
What exactly was said that was not in line with the expert opinion. See this is where my lack of knowing what sources are stereotyped themselves. I just go by the content of what was said. If that happens to be a source you don't like thats not my problem.
The content is in line with the experts and that why I linked it. Purely on what was said and not where it came from. I don't care where it came from because the whole idea of certain sources being good or bad is itself a subject and often biased opinion.
No not the other posters but the experts. That is where I am getting my information. Its not the worse or any subjective qualification. Its the facts.
Your US politics, culture, history, and law sources are as bad as your Egyptology sources. If your sources were any good your posts wouldn't be so dependably wrong. (Or is it that you don't understand them? I don't know.)
The point is you don't have to be an American to know American politics. You can know American politics from Americans who know American politics and then you use your senses to take that info in.
It is possible, but it we ain't talking about you, then.
I do understand english and what words mean lol.
LOL, indeed.
When they say the evidence shows that massive fraud has been committed and show the evidence I can be informed. Then refer to that as counter evidence to someone who claimed that Trump was a fraudster. That they have no moral ground to stand on.
What fraud? The topic is killing drug runners.
Most of this is not about American or Australia or any nations politics. Its plain right and wrong. The moral truth, commonsense, reality, whatever you want to call it.
And my point was that this was a sub thread over moral hypocracy. About the same people that are morally outraged have double standards and thus bias.
I am concerned that you find this immoral action to be so acceptable.
From what I was seeing with people making all these extreme claims about Hegseth and TRump being murderers and commiting war crimes. That same old extreme narratives ike Kirk and Trump are Nazis ect. It was my point that these same people have been quiet happy to allow 10 times worse bad behaviour and have no moral leg to stand on.
This was also based on the fact that the language was implying guilt in doing something morally wrong without the intel. This showing a willingness to jump to the negative due to political bias and partisanship.
Not politics. Unjustified and likely illegal killings. Don't need politcs to see that. I've got no idea what the politics of the Admiral who ordered the "double tap" was or that of the drone operator who pushed the button to launch the missle.
This was reality. I am am merely pointing this out. I have not said anything about the right or wrongness of the situation. Just pointing out howw the usual Trump haters are quick to jump the gun (pardon the pun) lol.
I was not making a case for Trump being a Christian or that this is about Christ v non or Dems v Rep or Left v Right or anti immigration or anything.
I was simply using those examples of the hypocracy of how the Dems under Biden and Obama did all that they accuse Trump of and have no moral leg to stand on. That it was their now proven extreme bias that causes people not to trust a word they say.
It sure seems like you think this is justified because millions of people could die of drug overdoses. (Or did I hallucinate that conversation?)
So when people start jumping the gun again and making all these assumptions of guilt and extreme claims of war crimes its history repeating itself. So its right to point it out.
We know the history of attacks on disarmed (non-)combatants and survivors. You should look into it. It has nothing to do with "hating Trump".
You can't help yourself can you. Doubling down now on IP.
Iambic pentameter? (clown-free) insane posse? Incan potatoes?
Us Aussies must be dumb, they could not possibly know anything. That bad old Fox News.
Did you notice at I mentioned that "even the Australian experts agreed". I said they were agreeing with the American experts
Nameless experts. Crikey!
It does not matter because everyone will pick a side and both sides are as bad as the other lol. But usually when people are so fixated on the opposition [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] political.
I've got 20,000+ posts and never had my blessing cursed by the bots. Watch your tongue.
But even if its moral there are mmore than one position. So when someone starts claiming "shoulds" then we can say that they have jumped the gun because they don't have the facts. Thus exposing their bias in assuming a wrong for that particular situations when similar ones or other views are just as relevant.
we actually know quite a bit. It's clear if you pay attention.
If someone states that what happened is X and this "should not" have happened as its morally wrong. Then they are declaring their position. We can read a lot from the actual words that come out of peoples mouths lol. Its the most direct way of knowing what they think and believe.
This is a serious topic. Your "lol"s are rather odd and unserious.
Thats unless you think what people about a situation or themselves cannot be trusted.
Actually I am going to bow out. I don't see any point and I have said all I can say on the issue. It will be a continual back and forth of peoples subjective moral beliefs on the situation without the clear facts. Which are yet to come out.
That you now understand morals are subjective is at least some progress.
