re: #145 Buck

Buck, what you have there is an assertion. You say that of course it’s different, but you don’t explain why it’s ‘of course’ different. To me, it’s pretty obvious that this guy draws in that style all the time, and so while it is unfortunate that this looks like antisemitic cartoons, it just looks like them. It looks a lot more like this guy’s normal drawing— especially since he uses blood and world leaders a lot. You apparently agree with this line of logic, since you said if two things look like each other, it’s a good argument for them being like each other.

Can you address that actual argument, rather than just reasserting that it’s obvious’ that it’s the blood libel imagery? An argument would involve in some way showing what I said is insufficient or wrong.