A Pakistani business owner accused of trying to hire hit men to kill a U.S. politician has been convicted in a trial that showcased allegations of Iran-backed plotting on American soil.
I don’t necessarily desire a revolution or civil war, But if you want to make claims about the voting status of Lemmy users, you can’t just pull that one out of your ass, my dude. This platform is definitely left leaning, and it’s definitely comprised of a lot of geeks.
I would question, do you think that the Holocaust could have been stopped without the use of force?
If someone broke into your home and threatened your life, do you think that the appropriate response would be to let them do whatever they want? Most people in that situation would call the police, which is a form of violence.
You’re not really answering the question. If what you say is true, then that means you would not defend yourself or a loved one against violence? Simple yes, or no. Saying no simply confirms your stated stance.
I’m not going to advocate for violence, no matter what you say or ask. Feel free to keep trying all you want, but I’m not going to change my mind or change my answer. :)
So yes, or no? A no simply means that indeed, you do not “advocate for violence”. It’s just a clarification confirming that, no matter what possible scenario happens, you still won’t support the use of violence.
Not clarifying that, while stating “no matter what you say or ask” is non-committal, as if you’re trying to give an answer that excludes the possibility of self defense but don’t want to admit it simply so that you appear pacifista absoluto.
I don’t necessarily desire a revolution or civil war, But if you want to make claims about the voting status of Lemmy users, you can’t just pull that one out of your ass, my dude. This platform is definitely left leaning, and it’s definitely comprised of a lot of geeks. I would question, do you think that the Holocaust could have been stopped without the use of force? If someone broke into your home and threatened your life, do you think that the appropriate response would be to let them do whatever they want? Most people in that situation would call the police, which is a form of violence.
I don’t advocate violence, and I never will. Let’s agree to disagree.
Why don’t you answer the questions? Let’s agree to disagree is just a deflection technique.
I answered the questions. I said I will never advocate violence. No matter how many whataboutisms you have, there is no “gotcha!” here.
I don’t, and will never, advocate violence. Let it go.
You’re not really answering the question. If what you say is true, then that means you would not defend yourself or a loved one against violence? Simple yes, or no. Saying no simply confirms your stated stance.
I’m not going to advocate for violence, no matter what you say or ask. Feel free to keep trying all you want, but I’m not going to change my mind or change my answer. :)
So yes, or no? A no simply means that indeed, you do not “advocate for violence”. It’s just a clarification confirming that, no matter what possible scenario happens, you still won’t support the use of violence.
Not clarifying that, while stating “no matter what you say or ask” is non-committal, as if you’re trying to give an answer that excludes the possibility of self defense but don’t want to admit it simply so that you appear pacifista absoluto.
I’m not going to advocate for violence. thx and hope you have a great day