4 ms·
My defence of that point wasn't predictated on the idea that what he said was atypical of his content. It was predicated on the fact that WSJ took statements c
by raesene6 10y ago
My defence of that point wasn't predictated on the idea that what he said was atypical of his content.
It was predicated on the fact that WSJ took statements completely out of context to have the exact opposite of the in-context meaning.
- fixermark 10y agoI'm not sure there's a lot of "Taking out of context" involved with paying strangers to hold up a "Death to All Jews" sign.
- raesene6 10y agowhich is not the point I was referring to , nice way to take my comment of out context. For avoidance of doubt I originally said ("The hit job was some of the other items they'd cut together to make the "anti-semetic" charge stick. One item where he was comparing youtube policies to those of the Nazi's (i.e. casting both in a negative light) the WSJ used as "proof" he was pro-Nazi. that's what prompted my thought of the quote.") My point was the the part where they conflated PewdiePies comparison of Youtube and the Nazi's as being him supporting the Nazi's, this was entirely take out of context. I wasn't referring to the sign there at all.