It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

How can this not violate Facebooks t&c's really? SHOCKING.

page: 3
4
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 14 2014 @ 04:34 PM
link   
Why else would i put it in the rant section unless it was upsetting in context?

I will take screenshots if you care.

a reply to: dollukka




posted on Oct, 14 2014 @ 04:35 PM
link   
a reply to: nonspecific


I brought it here in the hope that I could highlight a situation that I felt needed adressing. I did not realise it would gain favour.

I attempted to highlight a social issuer and failed.

Okay, I see you 'tried' . But really? Its a joke for all except the ones that made it. I saw a video about men screwing donkeys and getting shot to pieces by Apache helicopters. I didn't bring that either.

Its 'okay' to hate on Muslims in the West. We are programmed to do that. Necessary part of dehumanizing people in the region to further conquest. What better way than to directly attack their religion? We should see thru that and not "inadvertently" promote it further.

Ever see the children's coloring book thread? Someone bring it…
edit on 14-10-2014 by intrptr because: bb code



posted on Oct, 14 2014 @ 04:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: nonspecific

The popular belief is that we should not only encurage but promote racial and religious aggression as long as it is deemed both funny and promotes our own religion.

That suggesting that we infect other nations with disease to wipe out entire populations is acceptable as long as it forwards the war on terrorism.

And that extremism is cool as long as it's our extremism.

Comments please.


The picture as shone does not say "Muslims" or "Islamists" or middle easterners, or even a country name. It says Isis. That is a militant group, not a nationality, religion, race, or even a class of people. Now granted they are in fact Muslims, or Islamists hence the pig blood, but still, don't see where you get all offended by it.

Though I agree, in practice this would be effective, but probably a bad move over all.




posted on Oct, 14 2014 @ 04:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: nonspecific


I brought it here in the hope that I could highlight a situation that I felt needed adressing. I did not realise it would gain favour.

I attempted to highlight a social issuer and failed.

Okay, I see you 'tried' . But really? Its a joke for all except the ones that made it. I saw a video about men screwing donkeys and getting shot to pieces by Apache helicopters. I didn't bring that either.

Its 'okay' to hate on Muslims in the West. We are programmed to do that. Necessary part of dehumanizing people in the region to further conquest. What better way than to directly attack their religion? We should see thru that and not "inadvertently" promote it further.

Ever see the children's coloring book thread? Someone bring it…


Could you explain the colouring book bit please? I may have missed something.

As stated earlier I realise that my opinion is not in agreement here but would like to understand



posted on Oct, 14 2014 @ 04:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: caterpillage

originally posted by: nonspecific

The popular belief is that we should not only encurage but promote racial and religious aggression as long as it is deemed both funny and promotes our own religion.

That suggesting that we infect other nations with disease to wipe out entire populations is acceptable as long as it forwards the war on terrorism.

And that extremism is cool as long as it's our extremism.

Comments please.


The picture as shone does not say "Muslims" or "Islamists" or middle easterners, or even a country name. It says Isis. That is a militant group, not a nationality, religion, race, or even a class of people. Now granted they are in fact Muslims, or Islamists hence the pig blood, but still, don't see where you get all offended by it.

Though I agree, in practice this would be effective, but probably a bad move over all.



A fair point but how would this be an effective measure against terrorist groups such as ISIS?

I fail to see how this could be an effective method of removing a terrorist threat?

I look forward to your explanation.



posted on Oct, 14 2014 @ 04:58 PM
link   
a reply to: nonspecific

Ok, maybe I can explain a little. This Isis thing has people's attention. The videos and pic circulating show them to be an absolute brutally vicious gang of baby killing, women raping head chopper offers. This pisses sane people off, and causes those sane people to feel a degree of hatred toward Isis.

When a picture is presented showing something that could be devastating to Isis happening, especially when it ties in with two other rather unrelated current big news stories, (the wild fires, and the ebola panic), people get a laugh from it.

Does that mean we wish to actually do this? Likely not.



posted on Oct, 14 2014 @ 05:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: nonspecific

originally posted by: caterpillage

originally posted by: nonspecific

The popular belief is that we should not only encurage but promote racial and religious aggression as long as it is deemed both funny and promotes our own religion.

That suggesting that we infect other nations with disease to wipe out entire populations is acceptable as long as it forwards the war on terrorism.

And that extremism is cool as long as it's our extremism.

Comments please.


The picture as shone does not say "Muslims" or "Islamists" or middle easterners, or even a country name. It says Isis. That is a militant group, not a nationality, religion, race, or even a class of people. Now granted they are in fact Muslims, or Islamists hence the pig blood, but still, don't see where you get all offended by it.

Though I agree, in practice this would be effective, but probably a bad move over all.



A fair point but how would this be an effective measure against terrorist groups such as ISIS?

I fail to see how this could be an effective method of removing a terrorist threat?

I look forward to your explanation.


Well, the kill rate is supposed to be up to 70%, so it would likely be pretty effective if dropped on say, a large Isis camp. Not very selective if they are mixed in population with innocents. Hence the bad idea part.



posted on Oct, 14 2014 @ 05:04 PM
link   
a reply to: nonspecific

Use ATS search and type children's coloring book for a list of threads. Stuff about indoctrinating kids . Gotta go, check back later



posted on Oct, 14 2014 @ 05:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: caterpillage
a reply to: nonspecific

Ok, maybe I can explain a little. This Isis thing has people's attention. The videos and pic circulating show them to be an absolute brutally vicious gang of baby killing, women raping head chopper offers. This pisses sane people off, and causes those sane people to feel a degree of hatred toward Isis.

When a picture is presented showing something that could be devastating to Isis happening, especially when it ties in with two other rather unrelated current big news stories, (the wild fires, and the ebola panic), people get a laugh from it.

Does that mean we wish to actually do this? Likely not.


A fair point but when a photo or meme or statement that suggests that "We" could/should/will attack them with all might or destroy and degrade them or when we claim that national pride and guns will take them out or whatever it may happen to be ect.

Is it right? does it do harm?

No it is not and yes it does.



posted on Oct, 14 2014 @ 05:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: caterpillage

originally posted by: nonspecific

originally posted by: caterpillage

originally posted by: nonspecific

The popular belief is that we should not only encurage but promote racial and religious aggression as long as it is deemed both funny and promotes our own religion.

That suggesting that we infect other nations with disease to wipe out entire populations is acceptable as long as it forwards the war on terrorism.

And that extremism is cool as long as it's our extremism.

Comments please.


The picture as shone does not say "Muslims" or "Islamists" or middle easterners, or even a country name. It says Isis. That is a militant group, not a nationality, religion, race, or even a class of people. Now granted they are in fact Muslims, or Islamists hence the pig blood, but still, don't see where you get all offended by it.

Though I agree, in practice this would be effective, but probably a bad move over all.



A fair point but how would this be an effective measure against terrorist groups such as ISIS?

I fail to see how this could be an effective method of removing a terrorist threat?

I look forward to your explanation.


Well, the kill rate is supposed to be up to 70%, so it would likely be pretty effective if dropped on say, a large Isis camp. Not very selective if they are mixed in population with innocents. Hence the bad idea part.


Fair point but please give me a rason to belive your 70% figures. I would be happy(unhappy) to change my views with such horrific actual evidence.



posted on Oct, 14 2014 @ 05:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: nonspecific

originally posted by: caterpillage

originally posted by: nonspecific

originally posted by: caterpillage

originally posted by: nonspecific

The popular belief is that we should not only encurage but promote racial and religious aggression as long as it is deemed both funny and promotes our own religion.

That suggesting that we infect other nations with disease to wipe out entire populations is acceptable as long as it forwards the war on terrorism.

And that extremism is cool as long as it's our extremism.

Comments please.


The picture as shone does not say "Muslims" or "Islamists" or middle easterners, or even a country name. It says Isis. That is a militant group, not a nationality, religion, race, or even a class of people. Now granted they are in fact Muslims, or Islamists hence the pig blood, but still, don't see where you get all offended by it.

Though I agree, in practice this would be effective, but probably a bad move over all.



A fair point but how would this be an effective measure against terrorist groups such as ISIS?

I fail to see how this could be an effective method of removing a terrorist threat?

I look forward to your explanation.


Well, the kill rate is supposed to be up to 70%, so it would likely be pretty effective if dropped on say, a large Isis camp. Not very selective if they are mixed in population with innocents. Hence the bad idea part.


Fair point but please give me a rason to belive your 70% figures. I would be happy(unhappy) to change my views with such horrific actual evidence.


Ahh, I'm just going on a conversational level using the supposed current estimate of 70% mortality rate for ebola. It may be different depending on how much you believe what "they" say.

I don't have any hard evidence or even facts to back it up really. I don't think it has, and I hope ebola, or any disease for that matter is never used as a weapon. Pretty crappy thing to do really.




top topics



 
4
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join