this post was submitted on 27 Aug 2023
232 points (97.2% liked)

Asklemmy

43965 readers
1042 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy πŸ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

the deaths involved in the MOVE shootout were eventually re-categorized as homicides

Homicides? Do you mean first degree murder? Because to clear the bar you're attempting to clear you need to prove that "The goal from the start was to kill everyone there".

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I’m not going to keep arguing with a bad faith bootlicker.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

In other words, "I can't defend my words, so I'll ad-hominem the person who challenged them."

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I already did and it became obvious you were arguing in bad faith when you made an assumption about what a source said, despite not being able to actually even read it. You focused on the easiest thing to attack in the info I shared.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No you didn't, you never came up with any evidence to prove your point. You came up with evidence they were malicious, cruel, etc. Not that there was a plan in place to kill them all and they executed that plan. That was your original claim, and nothing you've said backs it up.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Explain to me what you think the goal of dropping 2 military-grade explosives on the house was. I'm honestly confused as to why you're so hung up on commentary that is essentially irrelevant amongst everything I shared.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

What's a "military-grade" explosive? Why focus on that, rather than the explosive power? If the "The goal from the start was to kill everyone there" as you stated, it's not the "grade" of the explosives that would matter, it was the quantity. They would have used thousands of pounds, to ensure that nobody survived the explosion. As far as I know the goal of dropping the 750g bombs was to destroy a "bunker" type structure, or to create an opening in the building the police could use to drop in tear gas or to enter themselves.

I’m honestly confused as to why you’re so hung up on commentary that is essentially irrelevant amongst everything I shared.

Because you made an absolutely extraordinary claim, and have been unable to back it up. You could have just backed down and admitted it was an exaggeration, but no, you've pretended it's still true, so I'm pushing you to either admit that you exaggerated or to provide evidence to prove your ridiculous claim.