And I don't remember Dan claiming the KKK weren't WS.

I think he was claiming that the Nazis weren't white supremacists because they didn't like the KKK, which is an incredibly facile interpretation of how Nazi and Klan ideology operated both then and now.

Also, what happened with the Candid thing? I don't remember Sargon being involved in that.

https://archive.is/oCJHy

Sargon tried to pull it under the rug to protect his SKEPTIC community and threw HO under the bus for bringing it up.

And lmao the Nazis were german supremacist you even conceded that to Ebowen.

They were then, but most neonazi groups have dropped that now. If you were paying attention, you'll know I also said that to him

If you were playing attention I was talking about your post above the archive link.

Yes. In which I say that it was a facile comparison for the way they operate now as well.

Now, what I don't get is why you didn't lead with the Candid thing. That one can definitely be proven. Why would you point to the SPJ thing which is basically impossible to verify?

To show that the Candid thing Is not the first time it happened and it will surely not be the last.

And now you are mixing nazis with neo nazis

And what are you talking about? there are witnesses and archive documents that Sargoy is not the the honest person he claims to be and that you don't go beyond a Google search is not my problem

Yeah, but you led with an unverifiable event rather than the very verifiable Candid event. You don't have to go off into the weeds like that to make your case against Sargon and yet you go ahead and do it anyway, making your case weaker for it. Stick to facts.

I went beyond simple google searches to try and verify the SPJ scenario. It's not my problem if you're comfortable believing what someone tells you without asking for evidence first.

I can copy and paste text into pastebin too.

I stick to the facts

And the text in the padtebin merely confirrms that a skype call happened. What follows the supposed text of the dm is the repeated assertion for which there is still no evidence. You don't stick to facts, you stick to heresay

Is an archive link, you can't "copy and paste" in that link

You can copy and paste text into pastebin though

We know the pastebin is the way it was when it was made, but we don't know if the text in it is accurate

At least not to the dm exchange, which is itself entirely innocuous

Do I have to kidnap Sargon and drag him into your house for you to believe me?

You have to give me something better than assertions

I gave you evidence

All you gave me were Qu Qu's assertions

In many forms, yes, but just his assertions

And the archive link which you dissmis BC well MaYbe

Why is he the only person out of that group that's said anything about this?

I don't understand why the Candid thing isn't enough.

It's bad enough on its own

I literally gave you 3 names before

Qu Qu's friends, only one of whom was in the skype call according to the pastebin above

https://youtu.be/8Qn8_U2qHGo

This video on the 20th of August makes no mention whatsoever of the dms, or tge Skype call. Both of which were supposed to have happened only 2 weeks before.

I don't dude, maybe BC info Is a bit too slow? Especially when is a priv Skype call

The guy who made the video, qu qu, was in the call. No mention

He knew about it as soon as it happened, but neither distanced himself from the event nor exposed the supposed wrongdoings for two months.

Honestly dude, I'm going to kidnap Sargon bc I could bring a thousand links and you would tell me "WeLl It cOUlD bE CoPy & pAsTe" coming from as you said a guy who was in the call and Is telling you right now what hapened but bc you didn't listen anything about it then it comes into question what he has to say.

it is allegations. there's a reason why eye witness testimony is considered one of the least reliable forms of evidence. it's a good thing then that you don't have to go to the thing we might not know happened to make your case. you can point directly to the Candid stuff. so you can't prove that Sargon wasn't trustworthy about his maneuvering in 2015. who cares? you can prove that he was patently untrustworthy with Candid. I am trying to help your case against Sargon here.

when you are accusing somebody of being untrustworthy, it doesn't behoove you to present heresay as evidence in an untrustworthy manner. I'm just presenting to you any of the arguments that someone who is interested in defending Sargon would give you. the SPJ stuff is only enough in my opinion to convince someone who already doesn't like him. the Candid stuff however, irrefutable.