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.

 

What's wrong with Liberals?

page: 27
33
<< 24  25  26    28  29  30 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 06:32 AM
link   
a reply to: STTesc

It's not about being a blasphemer, your comments were disgustingly racist and that is against the T&C of this website.
You broke the T&C you agreed to when you joined.
You can play the persecuted victim all you like but your post is right there in black & white - no pun intended.




posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 06:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: stargatetravels
a reply to: STTesc

It's not about being a blasphemer, your comments were disgustingly racist and that is against the T&C of this website.
You broke the T&C you agreed to when you joined.
You can play the persecuted victim all you like but your post is right there in black & white - no pun intended.


How is what I said racist when it's factually true? Africa continues to enslave itself, the middle east is a mess and Latin America is a hell hole. That only leaves Asians and Europeans.



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 06:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: STTesc

originally posted by: stargatetravels
a reply to: STTesc

It's not about being a blasphemer, your comments were disgustingly racist and that is against the T&C of this website.
You broke the T&C you agreed to when you joined.
You can play the persecuted victim all you like but your post is right there in black & white - no pun intended.


How is what I said racist when it's factually true? Africa continues to enslave itself, the middle east is a mess and Latin America is a hell hole. That only leaves Asians and Europeans.


But you're factually wrong. Yes, parts of Africa are in trouble. Ebola, corruption, terrorists, etc. I could point to parts of Europe that have similar problems (without the Ebola that is), along with Asia. Not sure where the 'enslave' part comes in. There are US states that have been gerrymandered to death, where the police can seemingly shoot people without much of a reason and where corruption is endemic. As for the Middle East, yes IS is a violent savage group that I'm hoping will be violently squished, but look at the countries that are changing and growing. Look at Tunisia, the Lebanon, Jordan. You can't write entire regions off, it's a generalisation.



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 07:10 AM
link   





posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 07:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: STTesc

originally posted by: stargatetravels
a reply to: STTesc

It's not about being a blasphemer, your comments were disgustingly racist and that is against the T&C of this website.
You broke the T&C you agreed to when you joined.
You can play the persecuted victim all you like but your post is right there in black & white - no pun intended.


How is what I said racist when it's factually true? Africa continues to enslave itself, the middle east is a mess and Latin America is a hell hole. That only leaves Asians and Europeans.


i think what this guy says here is true, but not quite as negatively as he says. i don't think progressivism is entirely wrong. it's partially wrong, just like with anything else in this life. the issue is where it is wrong at. the areas it appears to be springing leaks in, are the same areas the democratic party of the civil war era were having problems with: namely racism towards a specific group of people. it has evolved into a more caring and civically minded group, but has kept the root of racism, just redirected it and used it as a means to punish the ancestors of those who supported the abolishing of slavery.



i don't think the command for this concept of seeking revenge on the liberators, is actually coming from an american based institution. i think it's coming from the slave traders, who were right pissed off that we stopped buying their slaves
edit on 8-4-2015 by undo because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 07:54 AM
link   
a reply to: undo

Those folks that you're describing as "the democratic party of the civil war era" are now the Republicans of the current one: the Southern states.

The states of the old Confederacy sucessfully kept the question of civil rights mostly off the radar from the 1870s until the late 1940s. When they couldn't do that any longer under the Democrats, they were courted first by Goldwater, then by Nixon and then by Reagan and became Republicans. They didn't drop the racism though.

References: Dixiecrats, the Southern Strategy



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 08:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: undo

Those folks that you're describing as "the democratic party of the civil war era" are now the Republicans of the current one: the Southern states.

The states of the old Confederacy sucessfully kept the question of civil rights mostly off the radar from the 1870s until the late 1940s. When they couldn't do that any longer under the Democrats, they were courted first by Goldwater, then by Nixon and then by Reagan and became Republicans. They didn't drop the racism though.

References: Dixiecrats, the Southern Strategy


There you go again, bringing facts into it! How dare you spoil a good rant!



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 08:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: undo

Those folks that you're describing as "the democratic party of the civil war era" are now the Republicans of the current one: the Southern states.

The states of the old Confederacy sucessfully kept the question of civil rights mostly off the radar from the 1870s until the late 1940s. When they couldn't do that any longer under the Democrats, they were courted first by Goldwater, then by Nixon and then by Reagan and became Republicans. They didn't drop the racism though.

References: Dixiecrats, the Southern Strategy


i would like to believe that is true, because it's so much more palatable, but i think that's only a cover story, not for the grass roots people like yourself (because they enlist your aid by appealing to your ideology, a noble cause). however, if you investigate the behavior of your higher ups (i've had to do this as well, for both parties, since i have democratic roots. born in detroit, i was. ) and the direction they have pushed the race card, it's always onto those who were historically secular, anti-slavery, christian, whites. whites, particularly, because historically, we were literally, the only group who fought against slavery, EVER. (if you don't count moses)

we were also the only group to fight against dhimmitude or its cultural equivalents.


edit on 8-4-2015 by undo because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 08:04 AM
link   
a reply to: STTesc

Aside from your unceasing grandstanding and attention grabs ... what in the heck are you talking about with "everybody ran away"?

You do know how message boards work, right? You can post whatever you like whenever you like.

I've given you REPEATED opportunities to debate the facts of this question. Each time you devolve into these rabid assaults proclaiming that Liberals are communists, anti-American, cult-like, mentally ill ... with nothing other than your claims to back that up. THAT IS NOT DEBATE, THAT'S MERELY A ARGUMENT.

You've claimed that I've attacked you, I told you to prove it. You couldn't.

I told you that some of your posts displayed racism, extremism and absolutism. I showed you exactly what I meant by quoting what you had said. As I said, you've not just shown racist characteristics but you're pretty clearly in line with a lot of white supremacist doctrine as well, and I gave your own words quoted back to you that clearly demonstrated my claim.

You, on the other hand, do nothing but rant the standard right-wing rants about what liberals are and what we do.

Telling us what you believe is not debate. Calling us mentally ill, anti-American Communists, is not debate.

But please, "here" I am, you can post and communicate with me even when I'm not online: do it.

Make your claim, back it up, I'll respond and we'll see where it goes.


edit on 8Wed, 08 Apr 2015 08:12:50 -050015p082015466 by Gryphon66 because: Noted



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 08:09 AM
link   
a reply to: undo

Is it a cover story that the southern Democratic caucus effectively kept the question of real civil rights legislation off the books for 90 years from the 1870s to the 1960s? Nope, that's a provable fact.

Is it a cover story that in 1948 when the so called "State Rights" party broke away from the Democrats arguing for racial segregation, and whined about a overbearing Federal government taking away their "rights"? Nope, that's a provable fact.

Is it a cover story that Goldwater, Nixon and Reagan worked to win the Southern states over to the Republican party by a combination of innuendo and outright promises of continued racist actions? Nope, that's also a provable fact.

Read about the Dixiecrats and the Southern Strategy I linked for you above. Al the facts you need to understand this period of American history are in there.

Facts, not beliefs, not unsubstantiated conspiracy theories, not anecdotal evidence; FACTS.



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 08:22 AM
link   
a reply to: undo

I'm sorry, I was just working through the convoluted "logic" at the end of your post.

Are you really claiming that "white people" are the only ones who stood up against slavery in the United States?

I must be misreading what you are saying. I must be.

Please clarify?



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 08:22 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

oh i have reason to believe the slavers infiltrated the republicans. of course they did. they just formed an united front with the slavers in the democratic party and then reorganized, behind the scenes.

however, the ones on the democratic side changed their focus of racism from their black slaves (who they still have begging for handouts from them) to the white americans, who freed the black slaves, then they blamed their own behavior, on white people who were not democrats (notice how repubs conveniently shoot themselves in the foot repeatedly? nothing quite so useful as controlled opposition), and began this same chant, all over the world. this was very useful to communists and fascists, who aren't really communists and fascists in the strictest sense of the word, they are slavers, as their forms of government always resolve down to forced labor for the hierarchy.

they just get people on ideological grounds and then enslave them as well. since social struggle is their modus operandi, they switched it from class struggle to race struggle in the usa. then deliberately kept the black community as poor as possible, with only a few lucky ones rising above their condition, so they could be counted on to kill their only friends.

you see in a race war, they aren't going to care what political party you are from, mr. gryphon, nor whether you are an atheist or not an atheist. you are literally and figuratively, working for the party that has tagged you and me and everyone who looks like us, for extermination.



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 08:35 AM
link   
a reply to: undo

Let me see if I have your claims down:

There is and was an international group of "slavers" who infiltrated both the Democratic and Republican parties in the United States, and then took their "racist chant" all over the world (what time period 1700s, 1800s,1900s, 2000s, does it matter?) and then infiltrated both communists and fascists (who aren't really communists and fascists?) but are "slavers"?

Why are you talking about a race war again?



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 08:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: undo
a reply to: Gryphon66

oh i have reason to believe the slavers infiltrated the republicans. of course they did. they just formed an united front with the slavers in the democratic party and then reorganized, behind the scenes.

however, the ones on the democratic side changed their focus of racism from their black slaves (who they still have begging for handouts from them) to the white americans, who freed the black slaves, then they blamed their own behavior, on white people who were not democrats (notice how repubs conveniently shoot themselves in the foot repeatedly? nothing quite so useful as controlled opposition), and began this same chant, all over the world. this was very useful to communists and fascists, who aren't really communists and fascists in the strictest sense of the word, they are slavers, as their forms of government always resolve down to forced labor for the hierarchy.

they just get people on ideological grounds and then enslave them as well. since social struggle is their modus operandi, they switched it from class struggle to race struggle in the usa. then deliberately kept the black community as poor as possible, with only a few lucky ones rising above their condition, so they could be counted on to kill their only friends.

you see in a race war, they aren't going to care what political party you are from, mr. gryphon, nor whether you are an atheist or not an atheist. you are literally and figuratively, working for the party that has tagged you and me and everyone who looks like us, for extermination.


Are you seriously saying that heavily disguised slavers still exist? As I'm unsure about the entirety of your post otherwise.



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 08:48 AM
link   
a reply to: AngryCymraeg

Oh thank goodness ... I was thinking I'd had a stroke or something and couldn't read English any more...
edit on 8Wed, 08 Apr 2015 08:49:08 -050015p082015466 by Gryphon66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 08:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: undo

Let me see if I have your claims down:

There is and was an international group of "slavers" who infiltrated both the Democratic and Republican parties in the United States, and then took their "racist chant" all over the world (what time period 1700s, 1800s,1900s, 2000s, does it matter?) and then infiltrated both communists and fascists (who aren't really communists and fascists?) but are "slavers"?

Why are you talking about a race war again?


the communists and fascists are forms of government, meant to suck people in on ideological grounds, but are really, just slave systems. it's slavery to royals, where the royals are no longer claiming authority over people because of divine inheritance but because of science (the ubermensch) or atheism (god is the state). in the early usa, both parties contained slavers, but mostly democrats. these were people who were still running the slave paradigm from the old world. when the civil war occured, many of the slavers went underground, some infiltrated the republican party and formed an united front with the slavers who were the democratic party. and since then they've maintained a controlled opposition position in the republican party.

how do you make sure poor blacks blame their woes on the only people who helped them? you make sure your controlled opposition in the opposite party, always votes against anything that would actually help them. then, make sure the country believes that it's only because of democrats that blacks have ever had anything good. the problem is, race wars don't check to see what your political affiliation is.



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 09:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: AngryCymraeg

Oh thank goodness ... I was thinking I'd had a stroke or something and couldn't read English any more...


It's not just you, I had a similar reaction. The explanation that followed made no sense either.



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 09:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: AngryCymraeg

Oh thank goodness ... I was thinking I'd had a stroke or something and couldn't read English any more...


It's not just you, I had a similar reaction. The explanation that followed made no sense either.


okay, he says that the slavers in the democratic party switched sides and are now republicans. this is not incorrect, but the switch happened way back when the original problems were being addressed and it wasn't most of the slavers, but a controlled opposition. yes there are non racists in the democratic party! and there are non racists in the republican party. the difference is, the top of the democratic party is saying white people are the whole problem, that is a decidedly racist platform. why are they saying that? it can't possibly be true for either party. it's only a handful of very powerful and terminally in control, slavers, causing all the problems, but its blamed on the people at large, particularly those who historically, were identified as helping the blacks out of slavery -- republicans, christians or whites or all of the above.

you see, the top of the democratic party's food chain is a slavery system. you don't know that outright and can only discover it by investigating it with an open mind. you and me are just human chess pieces. expendable for the cause of restoring the world to full blown slavery.



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 09:37 AM
link   
haven't you ever wondered who poisoned the well when the blacks were finally freed from slavery, that at their fireside chats and church meetings, the word started being spread that even attempting to rise above their poverty and misery, was in effect, equivalent to selling out to the white man?

you have to stand in awe and disgust at how quickly the psyche warfare started in on them.



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 10:02 AM
link   
a reply to: Sremmos80
Amazing...I did not see any mention of Rush and O'Reilly in the post. Neither did I see "Faux News" but I see that coming as well.What I read was a heartfelt and informed post that directly addressed the OPs original question. That is one sign of the "what is wrong with the Liberal party" they believe their way and beliefs are the only correct ones , and all the rest come from Fox News , Bill O'reilly , etc. And that someone could have their own beliefs other than that is impossible. I assure you that you can research , look at whats happening and actually form your own opinion. (unless you believe what other people tell you 100%)
Believe only half of what you see and nothing you hear.




top topics



 
33
<< 24  25  26    28  29  30 >>

log in

join