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

Unfiltered Voices From Donald Trump's Crowds

page: 10
95
<< 7  8  9   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 23 2016 @ 12:28 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

I now regret thinking that you might use terms of physics over terms of art. The "force of law" is not an actual force nor a power, of course, but I get what you're saying. It's true that people sue for defamation etc. But how that relates to "words having power" is textbook equivocation. No, words do not have power. Boring is right.




posted on Oct, 23 2016 @ 12:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: Gryphon66

I now regret thinking that you might use terms of physics over terms of art. The "force of law" is not an actual force nor a power, of course, but I get what you're saying. It's true that people sue for defamation etc. But how that relates to "words having power" is textbook equivocation. No, words do not have power. Boring is right.


Perhaps you've never ran afoul of law enforcement, the judicial system or the bureaucracy ... you'd have a different opinion as to the "force of law."

It's not equivocation in the least. WORDS have meaning and impact. You can be sued for using words. The wrong kind of words can put you in jail.

You're faced with a blunt, overt example of the fallciousness of your normal "words have no power" schlick and as usual, you flail into semantics.



posted on Oct, 23 2016 @ 12:43 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

I've never stated words have no meaning, which I've reminded you of many times now. Making things true by sheer force of repetition is the ritual of the superstitious.

Yes people might sue you for defamation, or they might not. So which is it? Words sometimes have power? Not only do you raise a straw man but your blunt, overt example is as soft as a pillow.



posted on Oct, 23 2016 @ 01:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: Gryphon66

I've never stated words have no meaning, which I've reminded you of many times now. Making things true by sheer force of repetition is the ritual of the superstitious.

Yes people might sue you for defamation, or they might not. So which is it? Words sometimes have power? Not only do you raise a straw man but your blunt, overt example is as soft as a pillow.


Everyone has watched you and your regular spiel about words, LesMis. I'm not the only one who has pointed it out to you. If I can be honest for a moment, it's a running joke among those who bother to argue with you.

Please. Fraud, fighting words, slander, libel ... all of these are very clear (and basic) instances of the power and legal force of words. If you don't understand these basic concepts, I have no help for you.

You're being repetitive and ridiculous now in your attempts at ridicule. Boring even.



posted on Oct, 23 2016 @ 01:56 PM
link   
Over a year of rallies with over 10 million attendees... and the best they can come up with is a highly edited 3 minute montage of possible DNC plants.

Keep grasping man.



posted on Oct, 23 2016 @ 01:59 PM
link   
Ten million ... that sounds a lot like the running vote count we had here for Trump for a while ...

... I guess that didn't work out too well either.

Funny what can be made up out of whole cloth when there is no concern for the facts.



posted on Oct, 23 2016 @ 02:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

Now it's the legal force of words, and throw in the word power for good measure, with your definitions stretching as wide as your goalposts. Add on top of that your snark and ad hom, we have the going rate of all your arguments up until now. Words that are ineffectual , powerless and without force clearly demonstrated. Thanks for sharing.



posted on Oct, 23 2016 @ 02:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: Gryphon66

Now it's the legal force of words, and throw in the word power for good measure, with your definitions stretching as wide as your goalposts. Add on top of that your snark and ad hom, we have the going rate of all your arguments up until now. Words that are ineffectual , powerless and without force clearly demonstrated. Thanks for sharing.


Good heavens, now you're simply denying reality.

You were called on your faulty arguments, you respond with silliness.

You're welcome.



posted on Oct, 23 2016 @ 03:49 PM
link   
a reply to: kruphix

It's more about the racism, sexism, xenophobia, Islamophobia that concerns me.

They wouldn't have to use vulgar language for it to be an issue, but a lot of time with people this ignorant....vulgar language is their fall back crutch to make a point.


Such is the nature of slander and libel, it is very difficult for an average low educated guy to bring insults to the table that will accurately convey his ire without landing him in trouble with the law. That's why we have words like c*nt, motherf*cker, wan*er, ass*hole and the like to define those we hold in contempt. They are certainly profane, but that is the safety net for the common man who seeks to express his perception of the corruption, hypocrisy and all round moral bankruptcy of those he expected to represent his interests at government level. If you can't tolerate being offended, you need to grow up and stop blaming other people for your own lack of ability to absorb sticks and stones. Oh, wait.....they're not sticks and stones. They're names.....and NAMES WILL NEVER HURT ME.
Grow up, grow a pair, and stop being so desperate to be offended you knee jerk bigots.



posted on Oct, 23 2016 @ 11:26 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

It's simple. You're asserting that words have power, i.e. that they affect people in certain ways. Well let's think about this.

People can have vastly different responses and reactions to the same object, meaning that most people's conceptions about particular things are not really representative or truthful. Their reactions are determined by their own preconceptions and have little to do with anything inherent to whatever they're reacting to.

Let's use food as an example. One person might find sushi revolting, while another might think it's sublime. It's reasonable to conclude that sushi is neither inherently revolting nor sublime, and it has no fundamental capacity to cause humans to react to it in any certain, specific way. Sushi, at the fundamental level, is neither "good" or "bad" as we understand it, but indifferent. The same can really be said for everything external to us, but that's another topic for another time.

All of this applies just as well to words. One person hears and reacts to words differently to another. Therefore we can say that people's reactions to words are caused by some impulse or preconception of their own, and not whichever words they're reacting to. Fundamentally, words are indifferent.

This is an argument that's quite valid and it's been made countless times by intellectuals throughout history, you (and most most people who encounter it) are just not catching the drift. Research it, study it, give it some thought.


edit on 24-10-2016 by Talorc because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 24 2016 @ 05:28 AM
link   
when there is alot of people anywhere, there is bound to be a couple of bad apples

of the 10k+ you singled out 20 ?

for me, thats really a low amount of people, i still call this peacefull enough



posted on Oct, 24 2016 @ 05:29 AM
link   
double post, sorry
edit on 24-10-2016 by pheniks because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 24 2016 @ 06:31 PM
link   
a reply to: pheniks

What's disturbing is before we get to the percentages, there's first so much defense for what the a-holes are yelling. If these guys are really in the minority you would think the first instinct would be to condemn them, instead of defend them.

And isn't it a little troubling, when you go to a rally to support your guy and it just so happens to be the same rally all the white supremacists are attending? And to top it off you hear people yelling "F*** that n****r!" or "F*** those dirty beaners" or "F*** Islam!" through out?

Interesting bed fellows. For me personally, if I was in that crowd, it would be time for some self reflection. Other people, I guess, are okay with it.



posted on Oct, 24 2016 @ 06:50 PM
link   
a reply to: kruphix

Are these random voices or were they cherry-picked as being the most vulgar people of thousands upon thousands of people recorded? Imagine that, a sample of 2,000 people yields some vulgar mouths. I wonder if they are any more vulgar than Hillary Clinton's mouth.



posted on Oct, 25 2016 @ 06:40 PM
link   
Elections bring out all the idiots. I'm not surprised to see the hate from both sides. I think Trump, Clinton, and most of the voting public fall in that basket of deplorables.




top topics



 
95
<< 7  8  9   >>

log in

join