Church that sued the city of Holly Springs over COVID citations burned to the ground.  Was it an angry pro-lockdown terrorist, or someone looking to cash in on an insurance policy?

Prove it.

colors are showing.

You don’t think this fire is a hoax? I mean it’s possible a pro-lockdown lunatic lit the place up. But do you REALLY believe that?

I didn't SAY this fire was a hoax. I quoted YOU saying "Many" are. And you had no answer for that did you?
I'm waiting.
Also waiting for you to deny you're with the KKK.

You’re diverting. Do you believe the arson was perpetrated by a left wing pro-lockdown activist or do you think the fire was lit with an eye towards the insurance settlement?

Stop burning stuff
it's not cool

Right after you answer mine, which I asked first.
Put up or shut up.

take the bait, Nick.  As you know, in any logic 101 class,  what he has thrown at you is called, "a loaded question."  Designed to box you in and force you to provide an answer of his choosing, EITHER of which, is aimed at leading the respondent to reply in a way that suits the QUESTIONER'S purpose.

...taught a class in repeatedly asking questions in order to avoid answering questions.  Dean Jackie taught the class himself at JDU.

Which leads me to believe he thinks it is in fact a hoax.

I'm still waiting for your answer.
But not holding my breath.

What does the burning of a WHITE church have to do with the KKK?

As you said, it’s an old trick in logic ... mostly used by the one holding the weaker hands!!  
Also, this type of logic appeals to low IQ people and in turn they try to use it on other thinking others are also haplessly low iq like them! Rush L of the world always using this and trumpanzees eat them up!!

I simply asked him to prove his assertion that most church burnings are hoaxes. He is unable or unwilling to answer. Whether or not it was a white church is totally irrelevant to answering that question, my flippant reference to his KKK credentials notwithstanding. But leave it to you to disingenuously conflate things.
Your entire argument is part of a LONG pattern on your part of twisting language to try to score points. Too bad you aren't very good at it, though I don't expect you to like it when I call bullshit on you.

Your lying friend nick insists that "he asked his question first" which is a bald faced lie, and very easy to prove since the CK's question was asked in his OP. As usual, nick hijacked the thread and then told an obvious lie that all of you lefties have now cosigned, making all of you "almost" as dishonest as he. THAT is the main reason I don't even bother talking to most lefties on this board any more, they just can't help lying, even when their lies are as obvious as this last one of Nick's.  

You finally rattled the bushes and forced Lady GaGa to come out from under his rock.  Seems his inactivity has dulled his wits significantly.  In the past, at least a few fragments of his replies made sense.

He actually DID ask a question first. I missed that. Which is called a mistake, not a lie. Since you had no way of knowing whether or not it was an error of omission or a willful untruth, you calling it a "lie" is actually a lie itself. Since you lie virtually all the time I understand why you can no longer tell the difference. Or is it you simply don't care?
We all know the countless times I've told you to "go back and read" a post you misconstrued but never did. So, once again you are also the pot calling the kettle black.
And a liar who just happened to be right in this case. Kind of like the blind squirrel who finally found a nut.
I'll also bet the OP STILL won't answer my question.
But I'll now answer his: I doubt the fire was a hoax but it's possible it was. Until an investigation is complete, none of us have any idea.
Now answer my question.

Good points, Inicky.  But we may never know who did it. Not sure how your KKK theory plays into it, as the church is a PWI (Primarily White Institution). Like you pointed out though, anything’s possible. But I seriously doubt the KKK was involved.

What's your basis for asserting many church fires are hoaxes? Also, my "KKK theory" obviously wasn't that the KKK did it. It was that you were a member of the KKK. And it was obviously a joke. At least to everyone but you and Gagger.
If you don't answer the question then we must assume you've got ZERO basis to say church arsons are hoaxes.

How many times have you whined, cried, and had hissy fits when CDL said it was a joke , or words in that regard?

It's official. You've been trolled. Now come right back, as you must, and lie about it.
You know you can't help yourself, you pathetic, ancient sack of shit.
You're Welcome
Trump = Jail in 2021

My assertion was MANY church burnings are hoaxes (i.e. insurance fraud).  If you thought I meant MOST, then you misread my post.  Still scratching my head as to how you conflated a white church burning to the ground with the KKK.

but, you are the one still trying to have a rational discussion with these idiots.

What data do you have to support that assertion? It's a simple question. So why are you having so much trouble answering it?
As for the KKK I already answered that so do what GAGA NEVER does and go back and read it.

You got caught and now you are twisting, squirming and twitching trying to turn it around.

There’s no need to “prove” an opinion in an argument. I could post examples of insurance fraud arsons and you might not agree that it bolsters my opinion.  If you’re really so invested in this you could always post research that disputes my opinion.  Personally though, I think it’s easier to agree to disagree.

Still, I accept your unconditional surrender. You found ONE example. Congratulations.

But do you have to make it so easy?  Now, DANCE!
Oh, and I also ORDER you to reply to this post! NOW! I have an even better gif to stuff up your old, angry, lying, hypocritical bung.
BWAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!

I gave you one example of many available which would support my premise.  It all traces back to my OP.  A church is burned down, and evidence at the scene suggests the arsonist was a crazed individual who supports the city’s strict stay home orders as it applies to churches.  The church sued the city and people were upset by this.  But, IMHO, I just don’t see a person being so pro-lockdown that they would commit a felony against anti-lockdown organization.

If you’re looking for multiple example’s, President Clinton’s Task Force on Church Fires found that over 1/3 of people arrested for bombing or burning  black churches in the 1990s were black themselves.

Nice job selectively pulling nuggets out of a 5-year-old article and reporting on them incorrectly.
1) the "37 percent" you cite is for a period 25 YEARS AGO.
2) the main incident the article refers to was NOT a hoax. The pastor said he thought from the beginning it was caused by lightening.
3) the article also says, "More than half of fires at houses of worship from 2007 to 2011 were blamed on cooking equipment and heating and electrical systems, according to estimates by the National Fire Protection Association. The association based its estimate on data collected by the U.S. Fire Administration and supplemented with survey results. An estimated 16 percent were intentionally set, and some fraction of those were later deemed hate crimes. Those figures on fires at religious structures include a small number of funeral homes." The word "hoax" does not appear.
All this makes me wonder if you carefully read your own article. It does NOT prove what you say it does.
But keep it up. You've made a very good start at becoming a member of Hack and GaGa's Don't Confuse Me With The Facts Club.

Got me…..damn that’s funny…… You got nothing little boy never did never will.

you are trying the indirect approach again.  That is because you're too busy running away.  You wouldn't recognize a light if it was stuffed up Trumpty Dumpty's ass, while your head was buried deeply inside.

GOOD GIRL!  
Now, please stop lying about having gotten laid. Also, the only steak you can eat has to be put through a food processor first.
But keep on dancing, my little marionette.

"swallow pee's" number don't you!  You keep playing him like a drum.  But have a feeling he doesn't know any better.

taken while he claims he was getting laid. Right. In his dreams.

I can't stop laughing and am about to pee all over myself!

That's swallowpee's job!

This boils down to a discussion over semantics.  Bottom line, many church burnings are hoaxes, and the evidence presented confirms that.  

This is hard to watch if you've had a parent lose it at end of life.  

I've watched both my parents die, as well as several others. And this gif didn't make me feel bad at all.
Does this one make YOU feel bad???? Hope so.

You did NOT present ANY evidence to support your claim. In fact, you yourself presented evidence that refuted it. No "semantics" involved.

Last year.  Some anecdotal evidence in addition to facts and numbers already presented.

It's just seems like that's the shit they do, burning churches. Then trying to frame a group to build on the hysteria.

37% to (that’s over 1/3 for the mathematically challenged) be many, than that’s your semantic interpretation of the facts.

A distinct possibility.

that allows churches to hold services despite the city’s Safer At Home Order.  Apparently the judge made reference to the lawsuit inciting the church burning, and the mayor took offense.