(CW: Mentions of SA)
Anyway here's a fun compilation of Biden interacting with minors on camera
That's a classic too lol, but I was thinking of the guy who smirks and says "rent free".
Theye all variations of the same though
Tinyman
Missing the link
Yes I am. What goes around comes around.
The interaction did not start out at that point, it went there after you made it obvious you were not even going to watch the video of the event you talked about.
It's being made clearer by you continually trying to rewrite the course of events.
By very purposely asking such a vague question, I'm openly inviting people answer with the information that they deem important to the context of this image.
You do not openly invite to a discussion about an event by hiding your intentions, that is by it's very nature not an open discussion. Vague questions and answers also only lead to a bad discussion. A discussion which also requires interaction from you, which you have failed to do several times. If you wish to see an example of an open discussion, then go to the thread I've linked you.
And now you are trying to save face, but t his too you're unable to. Instead you make it all the more clearer you are acting in bad faith.
As with all things, there are extremely polarized opinions about Tianamen Square, the truth lies somewhere in the middle.
So you did know what was going on? Why did you ask what happened then? Also of course you're an enlightened centrist. The truth does not lie in the middle when the tale is one of lies and propaganda by the west, as many people have given you resources to see. You making this statement once again makes it clear you're not engaging with the arguments given to you.
Upvoted for the slop you provide
Kindergarten tier response
No, a confirmation that you're not engaging in good faith. The issue is nott that you did not see this first, but your behaviour through this thread, continued by this dismissive reduction of the critique you've received
You should probably have asked for that then. Or clarified when you got that linked. Or clarified at any point, instead of responding like you've done. Improve
64
Thumbnail: The conditions created by Trump
Crossposting my comment from the news mega
Okay but then that's an argument to vote for trump. Look at how effectively large masses of people could get motivated, organized and agitated while he was president. Kids didn't get out of cages, libs just stopped caring. There were riots and an honest to god revolutionary spirit in 2020
As stupid as CHAZ was it was at least possible to make something dumb like that. Now we have libs handwringing about Kyle Rittenhouse and genocide and all the other shit.
Trump was an obvious obnoxious buffoon who did what they all do, but with no grace or elegance that allowed people to ignore their lying eyes.
People didn't stop getting disappeared under Biden, the crackdowns only increased. I'm certain that if Hillary had been president we'd never had gotten a lockdown at all (look how quickly the west decided COVID was over as soon as Biden got into office)
There was ACTUAL pushback against state department propaganda about places like Venezuela (not that it was common, but I would at least see people questioning that shit in public)
Several countries started improving relations under Trump (notably the DPRK and ROK started getting friendlier). We saw him negotiate a withdrawal from Afghanistan. Not because he was good, but because he's a stupid clown.
The EU distanced itself from the US and talks of more centralisation started in earnest (I dislike the EU, but I think it'd be better if it weren't a US lapdog)
We saw people be more critical of the US government.
People went out IN MASSES whenever the government tried to fuck with women's rights or LGBTQ people. Now? "Oh the parliamentarian!" "Oh it's nuanced!"
Meanwhile under Biden the left has been abandoned once again. Nobody gives a shit about police violence or the climate or indigenous rights or global exploitation.
The secret police are coming either way, but libs at least felt scared under Trump, they at least realised they were in danger too.
Edit: Just remembered how people freaked out about Trump cutting funding for the national parks. Biden crushed a strike and nobody gave two shits, not even when the consequences came rolling around. I don't even know what gets cut in funding these days, because it's not Trump doing it.
:19:
66
"we should bomb Iran because they hate gay people!" mfs when they're in the Baltics or Hungary right now
(hexbear.net)
Or the same mfs when they're trans in Italy
This one was a bit harder to find a gotcha for because practically all European countries had decriminalised homosexuality by the 60's - Some of them twice! Due to 
Funnily enough homosexuality has been decriminalised in Turkey since the late 1800's (according to NATOpedia)
This map doesn't really show the continued persecution and is a bit more vague, but I dunno this is almost just a shit post anyway.
Cuba has the most progressive LGBTQ laws around, can Cuba just nuke most of Europe? (Yes, but not just because of da gays)
116
"Palestinians hate queer people so it's okay to bomb them!" mfs when they're in Texas in 2002
(hexbear.net)
On top of all that America also just actively persecutes queer people. People will say "oh that's just the republicans" as if that isn't half the country and it's not just the republicans, but a large group of democrats. Then they'll say "oh, but we're not as bad as [enemy of the week]" which funnily enough is actually a whatabouterismerino, but also not really a valid argument if you're saying it's okay to bomb a country if they're mean to queer people. So it's okay to be kinda mean to queer people?
On top of that there's also the fact that some of the US' closest allies are countries like Saudi Arabia, not to mention the many far right anti-lgbtq dictators the state has installed over the years.
On top of that the US has only recently gotten "good" on queer rights. Homosexuality wasn't decriminalised in the whole of the US until 2003 (and we're not talking some weird little forgotten law, it wasn't until a supreme court decision forced several states to finally stop being bigoted.)
At the same time the GDR had decriminalised homosexuality by 1957 and with constitutional reform fully legal by 1968 
The GDR did this despite inheriting the nazis legal code (according to a wikipedia source which I will not fact check.)
Would it have been acceptable, nay morally right, for the GDR to bomb the US?
definitely, but not just because of da gays
What else is there to be curious about though? The holodomor?