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.

 

Guilty by Association except...

page: 1
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 11:58 PM
link   
Van Jones to Trump: Why Not ‘Start Racially Profiling White Men?’




“I just think it’s really interesting that we’re talking about racially profiling in the context of mass shootings,” he noted. “The vast majority of the people who are doing the mass shootings in America aren’t Muslims at all.” Baldwin filled in the blank: “Young, white men.”


OK so know we know what the right wingers are going to say, that this is wrong and offensive and here are the other things they say cannot be claimed guilty by association, Catholics, (pedophile priests), Christians (Westboro church) and gun owners.

Here are the things they think is OK to claim guilt by association, Food stamp abusers (anyone using food stamps), Islam (anyone who practices it), Muslims (anyone who looks Muslim), BLM violence( everyone involved in BLM), young black gang members(black community), and one Illegal alien kills (well of course all illegals are violent and not too mention Mexican Americans). Let me know if I forgot some.




posted on Jun, 21 2016 @ 12:04 AM
link   
a reply to: shredderofsouls

Sure

If the people/person of interest is a white male(s), why would you not profile them as white males?

How will you find a white male suspect if you look for black women?



posted on Jun, 21 2016 @ 12:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: shredderofsouls
OK so know we know what the right wingers are going to say....


Gotcha. Bait thread. You might have had a shot at this if you didn't make it partisan. As it is, I don't care. Partisan crap bores me.



posted on Jun, 21 2016 @ 12:15 AM
link   
a reply to: shredderofsouls

I thought there was a noticeable "swing to the right" occurring in our new membership joining, i guess im learning that's just rhetoric coming from a discontent left, you guys are firmly in the jaws of defeat.

a reply to: intrepid

what did you expect brother? its in the mud pit for Christs sake, besides, you beat that left wing, anti west, conspiratorial drum yourself, and I the right wing, so non of us are exonerated, or above any of this.



posted on Jun, 21 2016 @ 12:20 AM
link   
a reply to: intrepid

Just pointing out the hypocrisy coming out from that side.



posted on Jun, 21 2016 @ 12:22 AM
link   
a reply to: shredderofsouls

You really need to stop posting these ridiculous and pointless threads. Maybe try being a member for awhile. People here are too smart to take you seriously.



posted on Jun, 21 2016 @ 12:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: TechniXcality
what did you expect brother? its in the mud pit for Christs sake, besides, you beat that left wing, anti west, conspiratorial drum yourself, and I the right wing, so non of us are exonerated, or above any of this.


No I don't. I just apply a little logic when things get a little out of whack. Left or right. I'm a Centrist dude. Hard core Libs consider me a conservative. I'm right where I should be.



posted on Jun, 21 2016 @ 12:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: shredderofsouls
a reply to: intrepid

Just pointing out the hypocrisy coming out from that side.


If that was what you tried to do it didn't work. Maybe try pointing out some hypocrisy on the left? It's much easier to do.



posted on Jun, 21 2016 @ 12:26 AM
link   
a reply to: intrepid

fair enough, perhaps im wrong and if I am i apologize.



posted on Jun, 21 2016 @ 12:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: shredderofsouls
Van Jones to Trump: Why Not ‘Start Racially Profiling White Men?’




“I just think it’s really interesting that we’re talking about racially profiling in the context of mass shootings,” he noted. “The vast majority of the people who are doing the mass shootings in America aren’t Muslims at all.” Baldwin filled in the blank: “Young, white men.”


OK so know we know what the right wingers are going to say, that this is wrong and offensive and here are the other things they say cannot be claimed guilty by association, Catholics, (pedophile priests), Christians (Westboro church) and gun owners.

Here are the things they think is OK to claim guilt by association, Food stamp abusers (anyone using food stamps), Islam (anyone who practices it), Muslims (anyone who looks Muslim), BLM violence( everyone involved in BLM), young black gang members(black community), and one Illegal alien kills (well of course all illegals are violent and not too mention Mexican Americans). Let me know if I forgot some.



Well, when it comes to mass shootings, the thing is there really isn't a common link so I think it would be stupid to profile people AT ALL. I think public places where lots of people gather just need better security. How hard can it be to post armed guards who actually know what they're doing?

Terrorism in general seems to be mostly Muslims. Face it. I still don't like the idea of turning the whole country into an "Everybody is a suspect" Orwellian madhouse. I mean, at the end of the day, that's really what's going to end up happening, isn't it? That's what they really want. It's so obvious.

I suppose some of them mean well but when you hear things like "If you see something say something" and things like "Trust no one" and you hear people talking about making lists of "suspicious people" who haven't necessarily done anything and just putting people on there for god only knows why (And how long do they leave people on those lists. I'm betting forever). You hear them talking about looking for suspicious things and warning signs in people's pasts because this shooter or that shooter had a bad childhood (Many kids do and most don't grow up and kill people).

It really just starts sounding uncomfortably like the good old USSR, doesn't it? There's that part of me that keeps finding my way back here. This is exactly what they have always wanted. Treating every single person like a common criminal and a suspect. We need to kind of see past the smoke and mirrors here and ask ourselves where they are really taking us. What are they really saying here? Is it really reasonable to suspect everyone? Well, before 9/11 I don't think most people would have thought so. We have been brought (slowly but surely) to this place where we're talking about crazy ideas. Or ideas that would have seemed crazy until pretty recently.

If this keeps up, then yes. I'm afraid it's not just going to be Muslims who are being treated as automatic suspects. It's going to be anyone who so much as blinks when they're not supposed to.
edit on 21-6-2016 by BrianFlanders because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 21 2016 @ 12:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: TechniXcality
a reply to: intrepid

fair enough, perhaps im wrong and if I am i apologize.


No prob man. The problem is we sometimes see what we want. I get called Lib/Con all the time. That's when I know I'm not screwed up. Still thinking for myself.



posted on Jun, 21 2016 @ 12:35 AM
link   
a reply to: BrianFlanders

What really needs to be done is to treat everyone as an individual not to consider them to be part of a group.

The left is just as guilty, but I find the right is more so.



posted on Jun, 21 2016 @ 12:37 AM
link   
a reply to: Metallicus

I said this before, It does not matter what you think or want, I do as I please.

If you do not like it, well that is too darn bad for you.
Stop letting something you supposedly don't like or care about bother you so much, less stressful.



posted on Jun, 21 2016 @ 12:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: shredderofsouls
a reply to: BrianFlanders

What really needs to be done is to treat everyone as an individual not to consider them to be part of a group.


To quote Wayne, "Party on dude."


The left is just as guilty, but I find the right is more so.







posted on Jun, 21 2016 @ 12:43 AM
link   
Anybody knows its elderly white women the TSA profiles God only knows what they could hide in their colostomy bags,as for people of olive complexion and swarthy appearance march on through.



posted on Jun, 21 2016 @ 12:46 AM
link   
a reply to: khnum

Yeah. That's why we don't have a profiling problem right now.



posted on Jun, 21 2016 @ 12:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: VivreLibre
a reply to: shredderofsouls

Sure

If the people/person of interest is a white male(s), why would you not profile them as white males?

How will you find a white male suspect if you look for black women?


Transgender transracial tolerance, simples.

Probably have to check the unisex disabled toilets to see if they're loitering in there, though, waiting to scare the midget marilyn manson fans..

This is a bit silly, the entire premise of this, is importing a culture that simply does not, by any count, co-exist well in western culture. To import it en masse with no checking of who is who.

But more of the same, it seems, he's just a meanie, and wants to lock out all the brown people. *insert eye roll*



posted on Jun, 21 2016 @ 12:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: shredderofsouls
a reply to: BrianFlanders

What really needs to be done is to treat everyone as an individual not to consider them to be part of a group.

The left is just as guilty, but I find the right is more so.



I'd agree with that, except there is a certain group that refuse to be considered anything else but that group. Judge the tree by it's fruit, you know...



posted on Jun, 21 2016 @ 12:55 AM
link   
I Just remembered one more, A pedophile dresses as a woman(has it happened or just in their imagination?) all transgenders are guilty by association.

Damn I am also guilty, labeling all right wingers when it is just a percentage of them although it is a big percentage, I am still guilty.



posted on Jun, 21 2016 @ 12:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: shredderofsouls
a reply to: BrianFlanders

What really needs to be done is to treat everyone as an individual not to consider them to be part of a group.

The left is just as guilty, but I find the right is more so.



OK, but what the hell does that even mean? That could go just about anywhere. It could be OK or it could be very bad. Could you elaborate on that even a little?

What exactly are you suggesting?
edit on 21-6-2016 by BrianFlanders because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join