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.

 

1984 is here, Democrat wants to punish incorrect thought (climate deniers)

page: 2
23
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 16 2015 @ 11:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: stosh64
a reply to: grandmakdw

You can see many here on ATS that would love to eradicate various forms of thought.

It will slowly become law, with MUCH public support.

Just hope your thoughts are not banned.



If you want a heads up as to whether or not your thought will be banned jsut head on over to reddit (you know: the PC circle jerk ATS is trying so hard to emulate) and see what crusaide all the 16 years olds are jerking each other off to.




posted on Mar, 16 2015 @ 11:27 AM
link   
So Al Gore saying politicians that deny climate change (and of course we know they doing it based on money payed payed by companies) should be punished and the title of the thread morphs inro 1984 Democrats want to punish inccorrect thought? So voting people out of office is now1984? Hell if your just going to make things up you should have added some lizard people and the NWO to title.



posted on Mar, 16 2015 @ 11:28 AM
link   
a reply to: Ex_MislTech


Anyone that has a cult and $200 million USD has plenty of sway in the US.


Just ask the Koch brothers. They've spent far more than $200 million on their cult.



posted on Mar, 16 2015 @ 11:28 AM
link   
Was there a law passed criminalizing denying climate change?

I must have missed it.

I thought 1984 was 31 years ago. Weird.



posted on Mar, 16 2015 @ 11:29 AM
link   
a reply to: MrSpad

Lizard people would have made this 100x more interesting.



posted on Mar, 16 2015 @ 11:29 AM
link   
a reply to: smkymcnugget420

Yes, because reddit is the cutting edge of political discourse. *eyeroll*



posted on Mar, 16 2015 @ 11:31 AM
link   
a reply to: grandmakdw

You won't get much support in fighting this until a conservative tries it.

Then people will be screaming like 12 year old girls at a Beiber concert.



posted on Mar, 16 2015 @ 11:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

But his opinions aren't law nor are they even being considered to be laws. The OP is a lie. 1984 isn't here, because the opinions in it are just opinions of one man who REALLY takes climate change seriously.

Though this shows an interesting case study. Al Gore presents an opinion, and the right freaks the f out like it is being implemented tomorrow. Why does it look like the right wants to silence Al Gore while at the same time screaming that their right to deny science is going to be suppressed? At the end of the day, I just seem two groups of people saying opposing opinions. Oh and a thread full of hyperbole.


So if being an elected official is all that matters, then we should expect the progressive left to shut about the Koch brothers right?



posted on Mar, 16 2015 @ 11:37 AM
link   
Reminds me of Valerie Jarrett's immortal words on "Payback Time":
i2.wp.com...



posted on Mar, 16 2015 @ 11:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Ex_MislTech

Fine. He leads a cult. There still aren't any laws being drafted, considered, or voted on that would put Gore's desires into effect. I just see a story about one man voicing his opinion which happens to be controversial.

If he was just talking I'd agree with you, I am talking about the back room deals
being made that will not see the light of day.

Political operators do things like the watergate hotel methods.

The real implementation of policy is often made outside the view of the public.

This is exactly what Brzezinski was referring to the public becoming
politically awake, and why they fear it.

Brzezinkski and NWO fear political awakening



posted on Mar, 16 2015 @ 11:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: Ex_MislTech


Anyone that has a cult and $200 million USD has plenty of sway in the US.


Just ask the Koch brothers. They've spent far more than $200 million on their cult.


True, there are manipulators at all points of the spectrum.



posted on Mar, 16 2015 @ 11:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: MrSpad
So voting people out of office is now1984? Hell if your just going to make things up you should have added some lizard people and the NWO to title.


Agreed! When anyone starts harping on what Al Gore supposedly said, the first thing I do is look up what he REALLY said.

And saying that politicians should pay a price for rejecting accepted science is not at all what the title insinuates... But it will get lots of stars and flags from the science deniers.

I so wish lizard people had been involved! What a disappointment!



posted on Mar, 16 2015 @ 11:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: grandmakdw

You won't get much support in fighting this until a conservative tries it.

Then people will be screaming like 12 year old girls at a Beiber concert.


You mean something like a certain Governor of Florida banning state employees from using the phrase "climate change" or "global warming"? I'd think employees of the state of Florida abided by Scott's ban of those phrases for fear of being punished. This was done by someone in an actual seat of power, unlike Gore.



posted on Mar, 16 2015 @ 11:48 AM
link   
a reply to: IAMTAT

Does it remind you of Sarah Palin's crosshairs? Try this. Google "GOP Punish" and skim through the often conservatives sources talking about who the GOP is punishing.

Boehner Moves To Punish Dissenters, Despite Past Statements

3 Conservative Leaders Warn Boehner Not to Punish GOP Dissenters

Colorado GOP bills would punish local governments that ban drilling.

Here's one from today (townhall.com via redstate, double the right-wing pleasure):

“GOP Leadership Considering Rules To Punish Party Disloyalty” – townhall.com

and so on and so forth.



posted on Mar, 16 2015 @ 11:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: grandmakdw

You won't get much support in fighting this until a conservative tries it.

Then people will be screaming like 12 year old girls at a Beiber concert.


Agreed 100%, no 200%

That is why I am just monitoring the responses, responding to many of the posters will only lead to an inane and pointless "shouting" match.

Good stuff I'm starring.



edit on 11Mon, 16 Mar 2015 11:52:46 -0500am31603amk161 by grandmakdw because: addition



posted on Mar, 16 2015 @ 11:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: FalafelBallz

originally posted by: beezzer

a reply to: grandmakdw



You won't get much support in fighting this until a conservative tries it.



Then people will be screaming like 12 year old girls at a Beiber concert.




You mean something like a certain Governor of Florida banning state employees from using the phrase "climate change" or "global warming"? I'd think employees of the state of Florida abided by Scott's ban of those phrases for fear of being punished. This was done by someone in an actual seat of power, unlike Gore.


Don't remember who defended that. Certainly not me. I do remember the thread on it. Lots of activity!

But it's appently different when another more liberal (nee; progressive) ideology attempts it.

Then you get alot of crickets and the low-key hum of hypocrisy wafting throughout the thread.

*meh*

#Sickofhypocrites




posted on Mar, 16 2015 @ 11:52 AM
link   
a reply to: grandmakdw

Or could it be that people actually RESEARCHED what you claimed and found out that it's completely baseless and a silly kneejerk reaction to something Al Gore said, and you can no longer defend it?



posted on Mar, 16 2015 @ 11:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: grandmakdw

You do know that Al Gore isn't currently an elected official right? He has no more say in how our country is ran than you or I.


Ok, I'll bite.

A former Democratic Vice President
A former Democratic candidate for President
is not a Democrat

and has absolutely no influence over currently in office Democrats
because he is irrelevant
he was only a previous VPOTUS
and only ran for POTUS and came close to winning
but you are right, he has no influence now
and is not really a Democrat anymore


LOL





edit on 11Mon, 16 Mar 2015 11:56:53 -0500am31603amk161 by grandmakdw because: addition



posted on Mar, 16 2015 @ 11:55 AM
link   
a reply to: beezzer

The difference being in Florida an elected official did.

Here, it's FORMER elected official with no say in government dealing anymore beyond what words his money can buy him.

Big difference. If a democrat in congress has suggested this, I'd be right there with the angry conservatives.



posted on Mar, 16 2015 @ 11:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: beezzer

originally posted by: FalafelBallz

originally posted by: beezzer

a reply to: grandmakdw



You won't get much support in fighting this until a conservative tries it.



Then people will be screaming like 12 year old girls at a Beiber concert.




You mean something like a certain Governor of Florida banning state employees from using the phrase "climate change" or "global warming"? I'd think employees of the state of Florida abided by Scott's ban of those phrases for fear of being punished. This was done by someone in an actual seat of power, unlike Gore.


Don't remember who defended that. Certainly not me. I do remember the thread on it. Lots of activity!

But it's appently different when another more liberal (nee; progressive) ideology attempts it.

Then you get alot of crickets and the low-key hum of hypocrisy wafting throughout the thread.

*meh*

#Sickofhypocrites



Maybe because it's Gore. Someone who is a private citizen & is not an elected official. There's a big difference.



new topics

top topics



 
23
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join