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.

 

Police Officer talks about his experience at Trump's rally in Tucson: AWESOME!

page: 30
66
<< 27  28  29    31  32  33 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 22 2016 @ 12:08 PM
link   
a reply to: awareness10

Did yo see the discussion about the number of views being cut from +300K to below 100K?

Stay vigilant, the conspiracy against the Truth is deep.




posted on Mar, 22 2016 @ 12:26 PM
link   
This officer's experience is only the beginning.

Trump has the makings of a great troll. I have yet to see the characteristics of a great president or inspiring leader.

He uses a strong aggressive attitude, which excites his followers, but provokes a strong visceral reaction from those who disagree with him. He then insults those who disagree, increasing the flames. And now already, in his home country, we have violent division happening.

What we've seen at these rallies, could be indicative to what he would bring to the world stage.



posted on Mar, 22 2016 @ 12:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: spiritualzombie
This officer's experience is only the beginning.

Trump has the makings of a great troll. I have yet to see the characteristics of a great president or inspiring leader.

He uses a strong aggressive attitude, which excites his followers, but provokes a strong visceral reaction from those who disagree with him. He then insults those who disagree, increasing the flames. And now already, in his home country, we have violent division happening.

What we've seen at these rallies, could be indicative to what he would bring to the world stage.


Or one could say:

The country has been divided for the last five or so years to an extent maybe not seen for 50 years.
Trump uses language that provokes a strong reaction from both sides of that division.
Therefore he becomes both a target for some and voice for others to express how they feel.
One side exaggerates and sensationalizes what he says in a negative way and uses hate for him to attack his supporters with insults and sometimes violence.
The other side defend him as if they were defending their own voice with insults and sometimes violence.

I reckon my summary is more accurate. If the US was a happy and united place in 2015 before his announcement to run, I'd kind of agree with your view, but it just is not the reality.

edit on 22/3/2016 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2016 @ 12:43 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

Dude, that's your eyesight. All I'm saying is...

Trump's aggressive attitude brings out visceral reactions.
We're seeing more violent reaction out of his campaign than anyone else. He has created huge division. He goes straight for the insults. That's just a fact that any reasonable person can see. It's a big reason he's on the news all the time. I'm just speaking facts.

This anger and visceral reaction he provokes with his aggressive attitude and insults; could be what he brings to the world.

And I'm not convinced that would be good for the world.



posted on Mar, 22 2016 @ 12:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: spiritualzombie
a reply to: UKTruth

Dude, that's your eyesight. All I'm saying is...

Trump's aggressive attitude brings out visceral reactions.
We're seeing more violent reaction out of his campaign than anyone else. He has created huge division. He goes straight for the insults. That's just a fact that any reasonable person can see. It's a big reason he's on the news all the time. I'm just speaking facts.

This anger and visceral reaction he provokes with his aggressive attitude and insults; could be what he brings to the world.

And I'm not convinced that would be good for the world.


My eyesight is fine. I have seen the great divide in the US over the last few years, well before trump started to run.
Can you not see that?
It's make believe to suggest the division is being created by Trump, though he is framing it and as I said, is the focal point of it.



posted on Mar, 22 2016 @ 12:57 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

Okay, look, think rationally. Take just one of his divisive ideas. Banning all Muslims from entering the U.S. Why are people so concerned about this? Is it because we want to be nicey nice and pretend it's not a problem?

We have 3 million Muslims living in the U.S. Radical Islam tries to convince Muslims that the U.S. is an enemy to Islam itself. Obama and Bush have always strived to say Islam is peaceful, we are fighting terrorists.

What happens when Trump's aggressive attitude to ban all Muslims, and the effect that has on the population, convinces any of the 3 million Muslims who are here, that the U.S. is IN FACT an enemy of Islam?

Trump's aggressive, insulting, inflammatory tone already creates violent reactions.

I'm not convinced a guy who attracts violence makes us safer.


edit on 22-3-2016 by spiritualzombie because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2016 @ 01:13 PM
link   
a reply to: spiritualzombie

You know what's really funny about all of your replies here to UKTruth?

You have repeatedly insulted him, while he has remained civil to you, which says a lot about You.

Stop trying to stretch it would you? Trump did NOT say all Muslims, You want to be right but lying isn't helping your cause, it's damaging it.

So the more your harp on and on about things that don't exist the more ignorant you appear to everyone else.

Let's try to be grownups here and play fair please shall we?



posted on Mar, 22 2016 @ 01:16 PM
link   
a reply to: UMayBRite!

Yes the actual results have been tampered with via media, but i don't think that matters to much as people seem to prefer Trump to the same old inside establishment ruling class.


Thankyou



posted on Mar, 22 2016 @ 01:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: awareness10
Omarosa Discusses GOP Attacks On Donald Trump | MSNBC



She was great - she ripped that hack interviewer to pieces



Yes it was great watching the interviewer sweat through that lol.



posted on Mar, 22 2016 @ 01:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: awareness10


You know what's really funny about all of your replies here to UKTruth?

You have repeatedly insulted him, while he has remained civil to you, which says a lot about You.

Stop trying to stretch it would you? Trump did NOT say all Muslims,


Trump wants a ban on all Muslims traveling to the U.S. So, read what I said about that, and let me know your thoughts. There is no need to stretch anything. I'm speaking rationally, and if you look at my posts you'll see I've spoken out against violent protests and activism such as road blocks. I don't deny this officer's account. I am being extremely fair. To single me out as insulting... that's a pretty narrow view.



posted on Mar, 22 2016 @ 02:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: spiritualzombie

originally posted by: awareness10


You know what's really funny about all of your replies here to UKTruth?

You have repeatedly insulted him, while he has remained civil to you, which says a lot about You.

Stop trying to stretch it would you? Trump did NOT say all Muslims,


Trump wants a ban on all Muslims traveling to the U.S. So, read what I said about that, and let me know your thoughts. There is no need to stretch anything. I'm speaking rationally, and if you look at my posts you'll see I've spoken out against violent protests and activism such as road blocks. I don't deny this officer's account. I am being extremely fair. To single me out as insulting... that's a pretty narrow view.



A temporary freeze is not a ban on all muslims though. if that were so they would also be rounded up and deported as political dissidents an dor security risk. Its perfectly constitutional as it was done a few times in the past.



posted on Mar, 22 2016 @ 03:51 PM
link   
a reply to: spiritualzombie

What's your solution to the current problem? Since these radicalized Islams are everywhere... you have no choice, but to ban the entire Muslim religion from entering the Country. I don't see any other way to "slow" down these terrorist acts... whatever we're doing right now, it's clearly not working. You can say this is racist of Trump, however I do not see any other plausible solution at this moment. It's impossible to satisfy everyone... just not possible.



posted on Mar, 22 2016 @ 05:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: ShaolinMilk
a reply to: spiritualzombie

What's your solution to the current problem? Since these radicalized Islams are everywhere... you have no choice, but to ban the entire Muslim religion from entering the Country. I don't see any other way to "slow" down these terrorist acts... whatever we're doing right now, it's clearly not working. You can say this is racist of Trump, however I do not see any other plausible solution at this moment. It's impossible to satisfy everyone... just not possible.


After the terror attacks today its clear that democrats can't solve this problem. Clinton just uses the opportunity to attack Trump and Bernie seems to think everything being done now is good enough.

As for the Republicans... Cruz is disgusting. He linked the attacks to Trumps speech on NATO to try and blame Trump. What a completely vile man Cruz is.

Kasich at least understands that ground troops are needed to wipe out ISIS, but it is only Trump who has solutions that might be hard for people to hear but are real.



posted on Mar, 22 2016 @ 05:06 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth



but it is only Trump who has solutions that might be hard for people to hear but are real.


What solutions are those? When I read your comment I went to his website and have not found any policy proposals he has on the terrorism/ISIS issue.



posted on Mar, 22 2016 @ 05:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: ShaolinMilk
a reply to: spiritualzombie

What's your solution to the current problem? Since these radicalized Islams are everywhere... you have no choice, but to ban the entire Muslim religion from entering the Country. I don't see any other way to "slow" down these terrorist acts... whatever we're doing right now, it's clearly not working. You can say this is racist of Trump, however I do not see any other plausible solution at this moment. It's impossible to satisfy everyone... just not possible.


I think to ban Muslims even temporarily is a bad move. It targets solely based on religion, and will empower anti-Muslim sentiment-- basically things that make the U.S. look Anti-Muslim, which risks alienating our Muslim citizens.

I agree more with the Bush/Obama approach to re-iterate that Muslims are not the target, but radical Islam. It's a delicate thing.

The problem I see with Trump is he simply doesn't care about delicate situations, and would rather talk tough. And the result is strong visceral reaction, anger, and violent protest.



posted on Mar, 22 2016 @ 05:18 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

It's not about Democrats or Republicans not being able to solve the problem.

Trump has no filter. He insults. He already has more violent protests at his rallies than any other candidate-- and those are his fellow Americans. The things he says on stage receive thunderous applause by the people who support him, but visceral violent reaction by the people he insults. He attracts violence. And this is him attempting to win the hearts and minds of the country.

It's a dangerous thing placing a no-filter insulting aggressor in the most powerful position to handle jihadists and countries with nukes.

Hot heads will not prevail.



posted on Mar, 22 2016 @ 06:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

No, I'm not conflating anything. You desperately want to take what I said and redefine it to suit your particular argument to expand and justify your belief/tactic that hindering a campaign rally is "suppressing free speech."

I was very particular about what I said, each time I said it, and I really don't care to repeat myself again. IF any action that impedes speech is "stopping free speech" (and everything from holding up a sign to making a crude gesture to blocking traffic has been called this by Trump and his people) then the attempts here to criticize INDIVIDUALS, publicly ridicule them, repeatedly post the same inane comments in response to their posts, etc. is also "suppression of free speech."

I guess I have to point out what this actually means: being rude to someone here, or disagreeing with them, or challenging every detail they post or ridiculing them or a dozen other things that are against T&C ("breaking the laws") is NOT SUPPRESSING SPEECH!

Yes, that is utterly absurd ... and remember that "tautology/tautological" term I keep tossing in seemingly randomly: THAT'S THE POINT!


If you are trying to stop people from "suppressing speech" you are, in fact, "suppressing speech" right? Do you see the fallacy in this supposition?

You didn't "shut down my speech" by making a string of personal comments directed at me ... and neither has anyone else. Only if I "break the law" (i.e. fail to abide by T&C) would I then possibly be "silenced" (post-banned, removed, et. al.) but that would be an act of the "government" (Mods and Owners) not other members like you.

TO REVIEW: Confronting others in the public square (protest and debate) and associated actions are variously discomfiting, rude, unpleasant, all the way up to assaultive and illegal ... but those acts are NOT suppressing FREE SPEECH!

Words and phrases have meanings. To diminish our Constitutional rights by falsely and errantly tossing around terms like "freedom of speech" to apply to two political groups acting like asses is utterly disgusting to me.
edit on 22-3-2016 by Gryphon66 because: Noted



posted on Mar, 22 2016 @ 06:18 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

I do not think that yelling at people etc. is stopping free speech. I did not see people saying that (not saying they didn't, I just didn't see it). However, blocking a street so that people can not hear someone speak is impeding free speech. Physically attacking them or threatening them to leave so they can not hear someone speak such as is mentioned by the officer in the OP is impeding free speech. Someone insulting you on a thread here, or disagreeing with you, is not inhibiting free speech.

By the way, I notice you have not responded to the fact that while you started off posting by calling pro trump supporters on this thread hypocritical, and went on to call them all attack clones, yet some how I am a bad guy for personally insulting you. I would really appreciate if you can show me where what I did was so insulting that you had to mention it, especially in lieu of your insults to other posters. Do you consider the fact that someone responded to you with disagreement alone as a personal insult?



posted on Mar, 22 2016 @ 06:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: UKTruth



but it is only Trump who has solutions that might be hard for people to hear but are real.


What solutions are those? When I read your comment I went to his website and have not found any policy proposals he has on the terrorism/ISIS issue.


You have a lot of revision and catching up to do.



posted on Mar, 22 2016 @ 06:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: spiritualzombie
a reply to: UKTruth

It's not about Democrats or Republicans not being able to solve the problem.

Trump has no filter. He insults. He already has more violent protests at his rallies than any other candidate-- and those are his fellow Americans. The things he says on stage receive thunderous applause by the people who support him, but visceral violent reaction by the people he insults. He attracts violence. And this is him attempting to win the hearts and minds of the country.

It's a dangerous thing placing a no-filter insulting aggressor in the most powerful position to handle jihadists and countries with nukes.

Hot heads will not prevail.





I already gave you my view on that. Repeating yours is not going to change my mind.




top topics



 
66
<< 27  28  29    31  32  33 >>

log in

join