You don’t have only those two choices. Be brave and support non-fire even if a majority isn’t yet. Be part of the solution and don’t believe the lies that better options aren’t real.

Firstly, you should say please when you’re asking for something.

The claim was made as if they know exactly the materials the thugs’ gaiters are made of. Unless they are an insider of that group, it’s way too presumptuous.

Common natural or synthetic fabrics aren’t as effective at blocking modern facial recognition as anyone might assume.

Here’s a couple examples of someone putting in a bit of effort to actually test both common and purpose-built products against facial recognition.

Which of their actions do you think portrays a political alignment?

I don’t think it necessarily needs the victim to have voted for them - it’s more about the majority supporting the referendum and also the incompatible representatives. The LEPF party were elected and are doing what they do.

Agreed, and it’s not like clean energy generation and good wastewater treatment are impossible - just more expensive. Perhaps 10x the normal cost per bag would pay for the difference?

The wealthy ones didn’t need to resort to veterinary medicine - their doctors were willing to be paid to prescribe the human version of those drugs. Legitimate drugs that save many lives, just not helpful against viruses like covid.

Giffords group lies or misleads about guns?

Agreed (mostly).

Just because something isn’t illegal, that doesn’t make it morally right. The inverse also applies.

Even though the First Amendment prohibits government suppression of speech, it doesn’t mean that the expression is immune to consequences from society including non-governmental suppression.

I think the “no arrests were made” observation was meant in relation to your last point, not the first at all.

Biden is owned by the same people as Trump. There’s only one party, the party of the Oligarchs.

Is not the same as

all democrats and republicans act the same and are equal

Refusing to see nuance in the difference between the sentiment of these two statements does a disservice to yourself and your cause (unless you’re on the side of the billionaires).

So here you go since you missed the distinction: they can both be (and are) corrupt, without being “the same”.

People like to point out all the ways they’re not the same and one team is better than the other. Fine. Those things can all be true, and politicians in both those parties are still corrupt.

It was only a couple presidents ago that Democrats had the House, Senate, and President. Even then they couldn’t get their own members to vote for anti-corruption legislation.

OP makes a statement that all democrats and republicans act the same and are equal

Wrong. OP never wrote that - YOU made that statement as a strawman. You should try to be a more honest person.

Disproves which part of what he wrote?

Or disproves the strawman you set up yourself?