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.

 

USA! USA! USA! Calling all 'Patriots'!

page: 6
11
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 23 2015 @ 09:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: PLAYERONE01

well allow your country to join the international war crimes commity if you think you still have nothing to hide and to see what really balances out....fact is i think there is a hell of a lot more skeletons in that closet

I'd be all for it, if I didn't think that said committee was just as much a part of the problem as everything else. Putting the label "international" on things doesn't automatically legitimize them.

I mean, really? They talk about crimes within the context of war as if they're two separate things.

Hello?




posted on May, 24 2015 @ 02:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: James1970
This is a great documentary from the Vietnam War.
Nobody wanted to be there!

I made it to about 21 minutes before I started sweating and my stomach was threatening to revolt.
I'll try the rest tomorrow.



posted on May, 24 2015 @ 02:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: awareness10
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

You're a tight one aren't you, getting yourself wrapped up in a knot because a woman won't give you what you demand. Did you run out of beer or something? You started this one not me.


If it was a legit quote, sites like brainy quote would have it.

Exactly. There are no legitimate sources for it. The source is a website trying to SELL things.



posted on May, 27 2015 @ 03:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: awareness10
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

You're a tight one aren't you, getting yourself wrapped up in a knot because a woman won't give you what you demand. Did you run out of beer or something? You started this one not me.


If it was a legit quote, sites like brainy quote would have it.

Exactly. There are no legitimate sources for it. The source is a website trying to SELL things.


The quote is from a book called The History Of The House Of Rothschild by Andrew Hitchcock. I haven't read it, and don't know his sources, but the book appears to be authoritative and I would wager that there is a source for that quote in the book's bibliography.

More interesting to me your method of finding one tiny part of someone's argument, what's called "inflation of conflict" in debating, and using that as your whole angle all the while skirting the real issue at hand and the big picture. It's really quite a petty form of arguing and is transparent to anyone who knows what it is. It seems to be every single one of your self-assumed 'trump cards', but it's really just diluting the conversation so as to keep it as far away from the topic as possible.
edit on 27-5-2015 by humanityrising because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 27 2015 @ 03:32 AM
link   
a reply to: humanityrising

S&F, every war is dirty, it is about killing and destroying.
But to lighten the mood:

because of the title for your OP
edit on 27-5-2015 by Peeple because: video fix



posted on May, 27 2015 @ 03:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: humanityrising

The quote is from a book called The History Of The House Of Rothschild by Andrew Hitchcock. I haven't read it, and don't know his sources, but the book appears to be authoritative and I would wager that there is a source for that quote in the book's bibliography.

Great, what is it? That book is not a source. It may be in that book. That does not make it a real quote, especially not from that author. So if there is a REAL source I am interested in it, since my original reply was asking for the source.


More interesting to me your method of finding one tiny part of someone's argument, what's called "inflation of conflict" in debating

100% false. It was the ENTIRETY of the argument.


originally posted by: awareness10
“If my sons did not want wars, there would be none.” Gutle Schnaper Rothschild - Rothchilds Mommy.

War is being waged against everyone unequally, for the benefit of the very extremely wealthy. If people are going to wage war, they'd better turn the tables first because the guys they're working for suck.


The quote was the argument. It was the quote, and then from that quote proof of a point. Your entire post is one big complete lie and utter garbage, like your OP.



posted on May, 27 2015 @ 03:43 AM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Clearly the paragraph below the quote is the argument.

Looks like a duck, quacks like a duck...
edit on 27-5-2015 by humanityrising because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 27 2015 @ 03:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: humanityrising
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Clearly the paragraph below the quote is the argument.

Looks like a duck, quacks like a duck...

The paragraph is based on the quote. The quote is basically the source giving weight to the paragraph.

It would be similar to me claiming a UFO just flew over my head, look here is proof, and showing some bad CGI.

Then using the video as proof that aliens are here, going into my experience having been abducted.

If the video is crap, then everything that follows is crap too. The quote was crap, rendering everything after it a meaningless opinion.



posted on May, 27 2015 @ 04:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: humanityrising
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Clearly the paragraph below the quote is the argument.

Looks like a duck, quacks like a duck...

The paragraph is based on the quote.


How can you prove that the paragraph is based on the quote and the quote is not based on the paragraph? Without a doubt? Source please? Your whole point is therefore moot.


The quote is basically the source giving weight to the paragraph.


Basically? That is in no way irrefutable as you have no source to prove it. Your statement can only be chalked up to your subjective conjecture. Therefore your point is moot.








Sound familiar?
edit on 27-5-2015 by humanityrising because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 27 2015 @ 04:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: humanityrising
How can you prove that the paragraph is based on the quote and the quote is not based on the paragraph? Without a doubt? Source please? Your whole point is therefore moot.

Because statements without anything to back them up are opinions. As I already explained, not sure why you are making me say it again.


Basically? That is in no way irrefutable as you have no source to prove it. Your statement can only be chalked up to your subjective conjecture. Therefore your point is moot.

Aahhhh what? So I need a source to prove they had no source? How about I quoted them. That's my source. There is no conjecture. It's not subjective. They either had a source or they did not. They did not.


Sound familiar?

Yes. Your mouth keeps opening, and words keep coming out, but it's the same sound of nothing actually being said.



posted on May, 27 2015 @ 04:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: humanityrising
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Clearly the paragraph below the quote is the argument.

Looks like a duck, quacks like a duck...


It would be similar to me claiming a UFO just flew over my head, look here is proof, and showing some bad CGI.


False. The quote has neither been verified nor proven a hoax, therefore your analogy is fallacious.

The argument was laid out, citing the quote, followed by a slew of other quotes in his next post, many of which can be sourced.

Are wars being waged for the benefit of the extremely wealthy? This is obviously the actual topic of debate, but since your whole game is nitpicking, tangential detours, and inflation of conflict techniques, I thought I might have a little fun with you though clearly the irony is lost on your end.



posted on May, 27 2015 @ 05:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: humanityrising
False. The quote has neither been verified nor proven a hoax, therefore your analogy is fallacious.

Sorry, you just proved my argument is not. If it's not verified then it's as much proof as a HOAX video, as in none at all. The only difference is that the quote has the opportunity to be proven, which I offered many times. As of right now it's 100% meaningless. Feel free to prove it, or don't and let it keep being meaningless. My reply was simple can you source that, which was never done.



posted on May, 27 2015 @ 05:54 AM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

The CGI analogy is a scenario in which the supposed proof was proven false. In that way this situation is different no matter how many times you parrot your 'argument'.

My reply to you is that you need to prove the quote is fabricated instead of lazily saying there's no source. You seem to be the only one concerned about this singular quote so that burden of proof is on you; get the book, read the bibliography. Until then your point is not airtight. The quote might very well be legitimate, we do not know at this time. Why you are obsessing over this quote when it is merely a fragment of the issue he was putting forth to you can only be answered with the assumption that you're inflation of conflict technique is really all you've got. According to your own logic you have accomplished nothing.



new topics




 
11
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join