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.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Frenzied Donald Trump Fans Are Turning on the Media -- And It's Getting Scary

page: 16
97
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 15 2016 @ 07:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: poncho1982
To pretend that the media is innocent, and are actually doing their job is laughable.

The media should be independent of party affiliation, and the moment they become biased, they are nothing more than a parody of themselves.

PuppyLove is right, they haven't been true to that in a very long time.


When were they "true" to that?

When were media corporations used for anything but profit for the owners and the manipulation of public opinion?

I've seen the assertion made here several times. I'd like to know what ideal world you're from.




posted on Oct, 15 2016 @ 07:51 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66



The OP is a clear indication that our political dialogue in this country is in shambles and some are resorting to violence and the threat of violence to get their unhinged points across. Some of you have conveniently forgotten that there is now a "right-wing" MSM as well ... just as corrupt, just as serving of their masters' interests, and far, far more biased and dishonest about reporting the actual facts.


Thank You from the bottom of my heart and the top of my mind for your contributions.

a reply to: Greggers

a reply to: theantediluvian

And Thank You, also, for bringing rational thinking and analysis into discussions. After years of national discourse falling prey to a confusion, a blurring, as to what is Truth, you are in the long fight to Make America Rational Again.



posted on Oct, 15 2016 @ 08:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Gryphon66


It's not a matter of "respecting" the media, it's a matter of not threatening them openly, spitting at them, shouting in their faces, leaving swastikas on the press table, etc. etc.


Wait you mean they're being treated like they've treated the American right for years?

Treat others the way you want to be treated ... It seems the media might finally be getting what they kept claiming they wanted. Now they're whining about it and so are you?

Crocodile tears I think, and it's no less than you've been warned about. You can only kick a dog for so long before it will bite.


LOL ... such compassion.

So, it's to be "eye for an eye" then?

Spoken like a true zealot.

I'm against political violence, whatever the source.


And yet.... you do not deny his very valid point.

The media has fostered this for years, now they are reaping what they sew.

As the left always tells the right... you do have freedom of speech, you do not have freedom from the consequences, and the same is true of freedom of the press.

It's not sour grapes, it is poetic justice.



posted on Oct, 15 2016 @ 08:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: liammc
What's scary is that everyone knows that the MSM is corrupt to #, but half of America don't care because it's their candidate that they are supporting.

Problem isn't the corruption, problem is the idiots who allow it.


And it's not just the media that is allowed a measure of corruption.

It's the politicians too, with the, "oh, everyone knows they are corrupt, it's just the way it is" BS.

No f'n way should any corruption should be tolerated.

Couple them and you have hillary.




posted on Oct, 15 2016 @ 08:16 AM
link   
a reply to: poncho1982

The members of the media deserve to be threatened? How banana Republican of you!

Or do you, like Mr. Trump, approve of trashing the First Amendment?



posted on Oct, 15 2016 @ 09:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Teikiatsu

People have a right to free expression.

The 1st prohibits government from censorship.


On this we agree. People have an innate, inalienable right to peaceful, non-violent free expression. The government cannot infringe on that. But we don't have that right to speak our minds *BECAUSE* of the COTUS. That right already exists.

I admit I'm getting a little knee-jerk on this point. But since I said it to Gryph I had to follow quid pro quo


I'm saying this is not a first-amendment issue. It's private citizens (conservative and Trump supporters) speaking their minds against other private citizens (journalists.)


But government does censor by using private agencies by proxy.


If that can be proven that government entities are doing that, it needs to be brought out into the open and stopped. But from what I have seen it's the leftist dinosaur media willingly and voluntarily assisting the Democratic party.



posted on Oct, 15 2016 @ 09:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: poncho1982

The members of the media deserve to be threatened? How banana Republican of you!


You forgot to put "So what you are really saying is..." in front of that.

As per your sig line.


Or do you, like Mr. Trump, approve of trashing the First Amendment?


Citation, or retract that assertion please.
edit on 15-10-2016 by Teikiatsu because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 15 2016 @ 10:08 AM
link   
a reply to: Teikiatsu

So you're going to accuse me of doing what you're now doing?

LOL.

Have a cup of coffee.



posted on Oct, 15 2016 @ 10:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: Teikiatsu


Or do you, like Mr. Trump, approve of trashing the First Amendment?


Citation, or retract that assertion please.


Are you familiar with English punctuation?

I'm asking a question, not making a statement/assertion.



posted on Oct, 15 2016 @ 10:21 AM
link   
Did anybody actually watch the video? The violence in the video is being caused by anti Trump supporters! Meaning the Hillary camp. It states as much over and over and over in the video. Just kind of shows you the intelligence level of what we're dealing with. Epic fail!



posted on Oct, 15 2016 @ 10:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

originally posted by: Gryphon66

The rampant right-wing attacks on Clinton merely serve as a smoke-screen for the real crimes that she and others in her tier commit.


And what would those be? This ought to be good...


Figure it out.


The problem, of course, is that the alt-right thinks every attack of the left is legitimate, even though a large percentage of it is not, as any independently thinking person can attest after reviewing the facts.

Anyone who acts like they don't know what stories account for the smoke screen has already swallowed the poison.

In part, they can blame themselves for the egregious things Clinton gets away with.
edit on 15-10-2016 by Greggers because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 15 2016 @ 10:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: Teikiatsu


But government does censor by using private agencies by proxy.


If that can be proven that government entities are doing that, it needs to be brought out into the open and stopped. But from what I have seen it's the leftist dinosaur media willingly and voluntarily assisting the Democratic party.


That's what I mean "by proxy".

Look at Facebook, Twitter and a host of other online venues that people use to express themselves.

It is constantly being censored based on nothing more than ideology of the host.



posted on Oct, 15 2016 @ 10:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: gernblan
Did anybody actually watch the video? The violence in the video is being caused by anti Trump supporters! Meaning the Hillary camp. It states as much over and over and over in the video. Just kind of shows you the intelligence level of what we're dealing with. Epic fail!


You cite intelligence level when you assume that anyone that is "anti-Trump" is "the Hillary Camp"?

LOL, okay.



posted on Oct, 15 2016 @ 10:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: Greggers

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

originally posted by: Gryphon66

The rampant right-wing attacks on Clinton merely serve as a smoke-screen for the real crimes that she and others in her tier commit.


And what would those be? This ought to be good...


Figure it out.


The problem, of course, is that the alt-right thinks every attack of the left is legitimate, even though a large percentage of it is not, as any independently thinking person can attest after reviewing the facts.

Anyone who acts like they don't know what stories account for the smoke screen has already swallowed the poison.

In part, they can blame themselves for the egregious things Clinton gets away with.


We have made the same argument.



posted on Oct, 15 2016 @ 10:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Greggers

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

originally posted by: Gryphon66

The rampant right-wing attacks on Clinton merely serve as a smoke-screen for the real crimes that she and others in her tier commit.


And what would those be? This ought to be good...


Figure it out.


The problem, of course, is that the alt-right thinks every attack of the left is legitimate, even though a large percentage of it is not, as any independently thinking person can attest after reviewing the facts.

Anyone who acts like they don't know what stories account for the smoke screen has already swallowed the poison.

In part, they can blame themselves for the egregious things Clinton gets away with.


We have made the same argument.


I know.



posted on Oct, 15 2016 @ 10:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: Greggers

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Greggers

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

originally posted by: Gryphon66

The rampant right-wing attacks on Clinton merely serve as a smoke-screen for the real crimes that she and others in her tier commit.


And what would those be? This ought to be good...


Figure it out.


The problem, of course, is that the alt-right thinks every attack of the left is legitimate, even though a large percentage of it is not, as any independently thinking person can attest after reviewing the facts.

Anyone who acts like they don't know what stories account for the smoke screen has already swallowed the poison.

In part, they can blame themselves for the egregious things Clinton gets away with.


We have made the same argument.


I know.


You know what the hardest part for me to understand is, personally?

Some of our friends on the right/alt-right here are rather obviously considerably bright. They exhibit a broad knowledge of the world and its ways, and most have considerably developed logical capabilities.

How is it that so many have fallen for absolute absurdities that don't even add up in their own arguments or criteria???



posted on Oct, 15 2016 @ 10:48 AM
link   
a reply to: Teikiatsu

You haven't been keeping up with the Wikileaks? The Clinton campaign has been colluding with the press and the press with them to craft their message. They were also working together back when Hillary was at State.



posted on Oct, 15 2016 @ 10:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Teikiatsu

You haven't been keeping up with the Wikileaks? The Clinton campaign has been colluding with the press and the press with them to craft their message. They were also working together back when Hillary was at State.


Ah, there's the "colluding/collusion" term that Trump is so desperate to have take off but seems to be going nowhere culturally.

No, nothing in the Wikileaks garbage has proven that the Clinton campaign is "colluding" with anyone, least of all the corporate media.

Are you referring to the cocktail party? Jeez louise.
edit on 15-10-2016 by Gryphon66 because: Noted



posted on Oct, 15 2016 @ 10:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Teikiatsu

So you're going to accuse me of doing what you're now doing?

LOL.

Have a cup of coffee.


No. I pointed out you are presenting a false premise and then a false narrative. And you are now deflecting by trying to pivot back to me.

I don't like coffee, actually. But thanks for the offer.



posted on Oct, 15 2016 @ 10:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Teikiatsu


Or do you, like Mr. Trump, approve of trashing the First Amendment?


Citation, or retract that assertion please.


Are you familiar with English punctuation?

I'm asking a question, not making a statement/assertion.


"Or do you, like Mr. Trump, approve of trashing the First Amendment?"

You stated that Trump approves of trashing the First Amendment.

Citation, or retract.



new topics

top topics



 
97
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join