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.

 

Trump disavows support of White Supremecist Groups Super PAC

page: 5
9
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 16 2016 @ 12:33 AM
link   
a reply to: matafuchs

Well he's certainly not saying anything like, "I don't believe in what they stand for" or anything of the sort.

Trump is basically saying he doesn't want white supremacists making robo calls. That's it.

"Please don't call voters on my behalf as a white supremacist group"

"Disavow the groups robo calls to voters"

So, if we replace "disavow" with "deny", he's denying the robo calls? What is this? This is some first-rate mumbo jumo. Trump doesn't want to distance himself very badly from these guys -- he just doesn't want them being to outspoken on his behalf because it makes him look bad.

If he really wanted to distance himself, he would have made it clear. Instead, we get some ambiguous "Shhh guys, shut up! People won't vote for me if YOU call them!"




posted on Jan, 16 2016 @ 12:56 AM
link   
A lame "I disavow them BUT.." long after the story broke.

And anyone who thinks the anger in this country will be "gone very quickly" if Trump is elected is completely delusional.



posted on Jan, 16 2016 @ 05:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: MystikMushroom

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: LSU0408

BLM isn't a black supremacist group... No matter how much you want to label it one.


"But they're putting one skin color above another!" I can hear the cries now. LOL

No, it's like speaking up at the dinner table and saying, "Hey, you skipped me when you passed the mashed potatoes, I matter!" And then your Mom saying, "Now, now...everyone matters!"

Well duh everyone matters, but that misses the mark. The fact is, you got overlooked. You were marginalized and want someone to at least recognize that and acknowledge that you matter too.

Oh well, some people get scared when others stand up for themselves. *shrug*


That analogy only works if prejudice is exclusive. It is not. There are many white, latino, and oriental people who get passed over for their mashed potatoes too.

I personally do not mind a message of Black Lives Matter because they do, and its right that attention is focused on a serious issue.
What I object to is the outcry when anyone says All Lives Matter, or heaven forbid, White Lives Matter. We now have people having to apologise for saying all lives matter.

As for Trump disavowing a white supremicist group, that can only be a good thing. Its easy for people who don't like Trump to skew their analysis to the point they conclude that it doesn't mean Trump disavows their message. I think it is somewhat underhand to try and pin racism on Trump because a racist group likes him. Before he denounced them, Trump was apparently a racist by association (a strange term) and now he is apparently still a racist because he hasn't made some statement about how terrible they are. Nonsense.

Who really believes that any politician is going to go through his list of supporters and make public statements about those that are socially unacceptable? It's stupid thinking to expect that, and the lack of those statements certainly does not make Trump or any other politician a racist.
edit on 16/1/2016 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 16 2016 @ 01:25 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

Trump's exact quote:

"I would disavow it, BUT......"

And he said it several times.

What has to be said here is "I completely disavow them."

Not "Yeah, but I can understand why people are angry."

Where he is going is incredible dangerous.
edit on 16-1-2016 by DelMarvel because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 16 2016 @ 01:29 PM
link   
How would you feel if the Democrats kept wanting to give you money. Seems a bit strange to me.





posted on Jan, 16 2016 @ 01:36 PM
link   
I'm curious if this super pac declared themselves to be white supremacists or if this label was applied by Trumps opponents.

It seems to me that anytime that a person stands up for people of European descent, that they are immediately labeled as white supremacists.

I do believe in equality. I believe that currently there is active discrimination against white people. But if I stand up against this discrimination I'm labeled as a white supremacist. I am not a supremacist, I just want a level playing field for my kids and grand kids.



posted on Jan, 16 2016 @ 01:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: Wildbob77
I'm curious if this super pac declared themselves to be white supremacists or if this label was applied by Trumps opponents.


If you're really curious it only takes a few seconds with a search engine to find out all about who made these calls.



posted on Jan, 16 2016 @ 02:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Wildbob77




I'm curious if this super pac declared themselves to be white supremacists or if this label was applied by Trumps opponents.


They are self-declared white supremacists. They purposely labeled themselves it isn't Trumps opponents doing.



posted on Jan, 16 2016 @ 02:41 PM
link   
a reply to: MystikMushroom Smart huh?



posted on Jan, 16 2016 @ 02:51 PM
link   
a reply to: Grimpachi Ill give it a try,,,It is because some of his policys are theirs also, and not to say I support Trump or the supremacist group. The immigration problems are a point they both share and they are right to be concerned obout it, doesn't mean he supports them, now if he took their money,,game over in my eyes.



edit on 16-1-2016 by darepairman because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 16 2016 @ 02:58 PM
link   
They American Freedom Party who is the subject of this OP are a White Nationalist organization that also promotes White Supremacy which I do not believe in. The problem though with any 'nationalist' party is that as soon as one says they want to only be with whites/blacks they are called racist no matter the agenda.

The issue in America today is that the BLM or the NBPP are Black Nationalist organizations who promote black values but, of course, they are not called racists. They want equality but that is what the American Freedom Party wants also. Bottom line is that they are all fringe groups that are protected by the constitution but that does not mean they should influence politics. It is personal choice and if you associate yourself one way or the other you can, again, be labeled racists. At least they will say it though, on both sides, instead of the closet racist. To me that is the worst. The one who will no declare until there is a serious situation or altercation and race comes into play.

It is a double standard again after many decades of progress.

As far as the 'but' in his statement, he is disavowing this group "BUT" is saying he understands the frustrations and anger of the country, not just white supremacy. Kind of like how Bernie says he has no PAC's but he is letting them all call and promote him. In his case though he is flat out lying about no outside funds.

I do not believe in all the BLM does "BUT" I understand why they are so angry. Blacks are immediately looked upon as criminals based on the actions of a larger percentage of their population . It is not just prejudice though it is profiling.

Look at it this way.I have friends who are cops, some in pretty bad places in Florida and NY. It is real simple. If you are a 22 year old white guy in the ghetto at 3 in the morning are you up to any good? If you are a 22 year black kid with a backpack in a gated community at 3 in the morning are you up to no good? 9 out of 10 times no. The white kid is scoring a dimebag and the black kid is breaking into cars. Reverse that. If it is a black kid in the ghetto at 3 in the morning there is a 9 of 10 chance he is doing what the white kid is and the white kid in the gated community is probably breaking into cars. If you explain this to some people they immediately call you racist. Why? Because of what is sensationalized on the MSM and TV. What is really is would be common sense. I hate racism.

Side note though, What we should be more concerned with is the millions of dollars the DNC and HIllary have accepted from donors with ties to radical Islam.



posted on Jan, 16 2016 @ 03:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: DelMarvel
a reply to: UKTruth

Trump's exact quote:

"I would disavow it, BUT......"

And he said it several times.

What has to be said here is "I completely disavow them."

Not "Yeah, but I can understand why people are angry."

Where he is going is incredible dangerous.


Nah - i think you're just reaching for anything you can to bash Trump.
The second you start micro analysing individual words and drawing conclusions, you're lost in the world you want to be in, not in the real one.
Sorry.
edit on 16/1/2016 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 16 2016 @ 03:20 PM
link   
BLM wants equality, not superiority.

They don't want to "purify" the black "race" or exterminate white people. There is a huge, massive difference between these white supremacist organizations that believe that white people are genetically superior humans, and that black people and other minorities are inferior -- based on pseudo science.

Spend some time reading white supremacist forums and you'll see how they try to justify their superiority over other races. BLM isn't claiming that the black "race" is somehow scientifically more advanced, and somehow deserves to lead the world.

BLM isn't calling for genocide, replacing one "race" with their own. The vitriol these white hate groups spout is so egregious I can't even post examples. You don't hear BLM saying, "Black people shall rule the world!" or anything of that sort.

Some people just hate it when other people stand up for themselves. SMH. I think it might make people question their own perceived superiority, and it makes them nervous (whether they want to admit or not).

I guess to some, it must suck when they have to share their social status after having that elevated spot to themselves for so long...



posted on Jan, 16 2016 @ 05:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: DelMarvel
a reply to: UKTruth

Trump's exact quote:

"I would disavow it, BUT......"

And he said it several times.

What has to be said here is "I completely disavow them."

Not "Yeah, but I can understand why people are angry."

Where he is going is incredible dangerous.


Nah - i think you're just reaching for anything you can to bash Trump.
The second you start micro analysing individual words and drawing conclusions, you're lost in the world you want to be in, not in the real one.
Sorry.


Yeah, heaven forbid someone starts actually analyzing the words that candidates are saying.

I can see how that would be especially problematic for someone trying to defend Donald Trump.



posted on Jan, 16 2016 @ 05:12 PM
link   
a reply to: MystikMushroom

BLM supporters here...

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

Calling for Open Season on white people and crackas...they do not have to replace they just have to kill what they hate.

Why must they also target eating establishments? They barge into restaurants and that is ok? White privilege again? Sorry, black people eat brunch too....



posted on Jan, 16 2016 @ 05:13 PM
link   
a reply to: DelMarvel

What does disavow mean?



posted on Jan, 16 2016 @ 05:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

The second you start micro analysing individual words and drawing conclusions,
Sorry.


And this isn't "micro analysing."

His campaign said nothing about this when the news broke. It was well after the fact that he had to be pressed by the media and he qualified his "disavowal" by saying the racists were justifiably angry.

These robocalls would have derailed anyone else's campaign but Trump gets nearly a complete pass. It's really disgusting.



posted on Jan, 16 2016 @ 05:44 PM
link   
a reply to: DelMarvel

He is not a racist...He even fired staffers as well a rebuffing Justice Scalias remarks about blacks...




But he previously brushed off Duke’s support, telling Bloomberg News: “I don’t need his endorsement; I certainly wouldn’t want his endorsement. I don’t need anyone’s endorsement.” When Bloomberg’s Mark Halperin and John Heilemann asked whether he would repudiate Duke’s support, Trump replied: “Sure, I would if that would make you feel better.”

Trump does not endorse white supremacist groups, and his campaign has fired two staffers for posting racially offensive material on social media. The candidate recently shocked some conservatives by criticizing Justice Antonin Scalia after Scalia argued that black students would perform better in “slower-track” universities.

“I thought it was very tough to the African American community, actually,” Trump told CNN’s Jake Tapper.


www.washingtonpost.com...

It is also not something the campaign is now just addressing. I suggest this article from the New Yorker from August of last year.

www.newyorker.com...

There is nothing here no matter how hard you try. Sorry.



posted on Jan, 16 2016 @ 06:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: DelMarvel

originally posted by: UKTruth

The second you start micro analysing individual words and drawing conclusions,
Sorry.


And this isn't "micro analysing."

His campaign said nothing about this when the news broke. It was well after the fact that he had to be pressed by the media and he qualified his "disavowal" by saying the racists were justifiably angry.

These robocalls would have derailed anyone else's campaign but Trump gets nearly a complete pass. It's really disgusting.


Well, the racists you are referring to may well be justifyably angry. They might be angry about the same things that people who are not racist are angry about. There is absolutley no evidence to suggest Trump was giving credence to their racist views.

Trump may want their votes because it helps him win. They are going to vote for someone, right? Or should they not be allowed?

As for analyzing words, of course we should, but analysis is not as simple as jumping to a pre determined conclusion because it suits your narrative. Thats called verification error in analysis. I spotted your slight change to my point , shifting 'individual words' to 'words' in general, by the way. Just another example of a leap to conclude on your own point of view, which is exactly what you are doing with Trump.

I have seen no proper analysis yet that tells me Trump is racist or supports racist groups.



edit on 16/1/2016 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join