Oh, so if someone reported a Uigher genocide denier, you would ban the person who reported them for "attacking other user?"
Rhetorical question; of course you wouldn't; because you're a hypocritical zionist scumbag who only opposes genocide when the West's enemies do it.
we don’t allow people to be assholes to other users.
Well that's just a straight up, easily verifiable lie; you give complete free reign to the people who agree with you to be the biggest assholes imaginable to the people you disagree with. You'll only step in to make sure they get to dish it out without having to take it in return.
I've given you all the time you deserve. At this point you're a lost cause. My replies are for anyone else in the future so they can see just how worthless your opinions are. You keep making that point for me with each and every reply.
Maybe you need to let that brain out of the box once in a while, let it get some fresh air or touch grass or something. Poor thing must be stifled by now.
What's the matter, you're not used to people actually being able to disagree with you without you just hammering the ban button on them like the angry man child that you are?
You keep making that point for me with each and every reply.
Damn, do they give you zionist drones a list with these pre-approved come backs on them? Literally word for word the same ones every time.
Maybe you need to let that brain out of the box once in a while, let it get some fresh air or touch grass or something. Poor thing must be stifled by now.
Damn, you really are a loser with no wit at all.
And remember; you openly admitted here that you protect Gaza genocide denier, I'll make sure to remind you if you ever muster up the balls to step out of your carefully curated little zionist throne room.
Yup, because you crossed a line attacking other users, we don't allow people to be assholes to other users. Get over yourself.
Oh, so if someone reported a Uigher genocide denier, you would ban the person who reported them for "attacking other user?"
Rhetorical question; of course you wouldn't; because you're a hypocritical zionist scumbag who only opposes genocide when the West's enemies do it.
Well that's just a straight up, easily verifiable lie; you give complete free reign to the people who agree with you to be the biggest assholes imaginable to the people you disagree with. You'll only step in to make sure they get to dish it out without having to take it in return.
Not only WOULD I, I have done that. In fact I've repeatedly banned users for spreading the Chinese propaganda that there is no Uyghur genocide.
p.s. - The correct Western spelling is "Uyghur" not "Uigher". Yes, I have to look it up every damn time too.
Great, glad you openly admit to being a hypocritical piece of shit.
PS. Maybe you should have actually read my question before giving that answer, dipshit.
I've given you all the time you deserve. At this point you're a lost cause. My replies are for anyone else in the future so they can see just how worthless your opinions are. You keep making that point for me with each and every reply.
Maybe you need to let that brain out of the box once in a while, let it get some fresh air or touch grass or something. Poor thing must be stifled by now.
What's the matter, you're not used to people actually being able to disagree with you without you just hammering the ban button on them like the angry man child that you are?
Damn, do they give you zionist drones a list with these pre-approved come backs on them? Literally word for word the same ones every time.
Damn, you really are a loser with no wit at all.
And remember; you openly admitted here that you protect Gaza genocide denier, I'll make sure to remind you if you ever muster up the balls to step out of your carefully curated little zionist throne room.
Argumentum ad populum, suck it dry
Oh, quick question: is the Australian Strategic Policy institute an impartial source? How about Adrian Zenz?
Oh wait, you're a hypocritical little toad, so of course you consider them impartial.
Argumentum ad populum, suck it dry