I'll take the backhanded compliment for what it is and move on…

Pedantic troll is pedantic. I'm saving myself more stress trying to pull you apart since you're the kind of troll that doesn't acknowledge any actual arguments but simply plucks out random remarks to comment on by ignoring context.

That's extremely presumptive of you. In fact, I'm not ever sure where it became an issue of defending it….All I saw was defending BLM's right to a message and by proxy their message itself then turning it into a series of discussions on ad hominems.

I don't know, the fact that you have had 2-3 defenders in this thread and gotten highly defensive suggests that I'm either right and you're worried about your views being known OR I'm wrong and you're now so frustrated that you're willing to commit the same act to get retribution…thus making you vindictive and myself…

Well the fact that you feel that a logical fallacy being committed is 'factual' but without context is a reason to not bother with you. Pseudo-intellectualism combined with a constant dodge is boring. If you want to debate the finer points of an ad hominem (since you've turned this whole argument into knowing if a…

Ah, yes, because you know us so well. Thanks for making an unsubstantiated dig to prove that I'm being ironic for declaring South Park followers to be supportive of somewhat repressive views.

Yeah, I see it from a strictly 'story leader' role it makes sense that she doesn't remove somebody who could clearly be her undoing. It's just really quite rare in the real world….Well, actually in the real world a situation like this would entail them leaving in the middle of the night to escape her power but we all…

And you've proven what? That your argument is definitively sound by refusing to acknowledge any challengers or are you merely going to insist I've committed to strawman argument? Frankly it's tiresome that you think a few typos suddenly breaks everything down.

It's more to the point that I find dealing with the average ill informed citizen to be frustrating.

So now it's all a ephemeral show to please my self-righteous indignation?

Wow, pretty desperate to take a one-off remark as the basis of the argument. Now you're just getting pouty….Your world views are frankly unknown at this point but it was drawn on the fact that so many showed up so quickly to defend mrcecil and by virtue reinforce the attitudes of 'anti-pc' that seem to pervade the…

Well when you want to make statements about something like that, perhaps you should explain your goals better otherwise I'm going to have to work at face value…

I can draw correlation which is what the social sciences do. You're going to keep trying to tell me that I'll never know his motives and I'll explain to you that I don't care what his motives are, correlation of his actions is more important (or spoken actions in this case).

Ah, alright, now we're getting on the same page in that respect. That's the problem though with civil disobedience in of itself, it's disobedience, there are always going to be issues within the tactics itself but to declare something bad or wrong on the basis of a failed moment puts the whole issue not at their feet…

I'm giving them an opening to defend their arguments, just because they choose to write broad stroke statements doesn't mean I can pull apart what they infer until they deny it.

Correlation is a strong value but since you're all getting into a defensive stance to protect your worldviews it must be hitting a nerve…

You were never required to respond, my little faux opponent. You simply could have stayed silent, instead you double downed and I am fine with your silence at this point.

And we're back to the 'order' argument and how black arguments need to be above reproach to be taken seriously. Even when they explain their actions, work as hard as possible, this argument comes around to declare every fault, every imperfection, is complete justification for ignorance and denial.

It was more so pointed towards the fact that when people use such obtuse attacks against them (for blocking a highway in the name of safety) you're going to remind me of how Nixon used 'law and order' for cover of racism and oppression of liberal ideals.

No, you don't respect my view, that's the whole point. You've shoved it off without a consideration because you're walking the 'middle' in your mind. You didn't address a single thought and I can refrain from assuming you're a white male middle class member but you sure aren't interested in hearing the views…