You are wasting your time as he has no ability to deal with counter-information. He posted two videos from London suggesting they show different things. One was from Sky News and the other--don't laugh--was from "Kevin Agastra." This isn't "a debate" in any sense of the word. And I'm not "pretending" to ignore him, I'm just ignoring him as it's pointless to have a debate with someone who thinks their evidence is a youtube video posted by Kevin Agastra. But I give you high marks for trying!
Apart from
the London data that I posted earlier which clearly show no two-tiered policing, a FOI request asked of the Met Police reveals the following:
But numbers, evidence, and a preponderance of data obviously don't matter when you engage in ferocious, knife-to-the-heart debate tactics such as
"with all due disrespect i don`t have to give you evidence" and
"I'll never change my mind about official/establishment "Climate warming" and bizarrely
"i`ve been very aware of and involved with the natural world for decades and the "official" line is bogus, i wholeheartedly know it and that`s why my conviction is unshakeable."
I mean, why bother to engage with this? He isn't going to engage in the numbers I posted, which clearly show that there isn't some sort of free pass being given to BLM protesters by the met police. This is why I ignore him and why his only rebuttal is dumb puns on my moniker and to puzzlingly call me a narcissist, as if self-vanity has anything to do with climate change, BLM protests, or anti-lockdown measures--all things he can't sensibly discuss in any adult fashion.
