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

---Hard To Watch---High School Girl Viciously Attacked For Supporting Donald Trump

page: 8
25
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 12 2016 @ 02:26 AM
link   
a reply to: seasonal

I'm Kris Contreras, and I'm one of the main students who helped organize this PEACE RALLY and make it happen. I want to start off by saying that this was NOT about trump, or the fight involving Jade and Maliyah, but about spreading Peace, Love, Hope, and Non-Violence. The news outlets are posting it as a trump protest. WRONG. This is so much more and I'm sure anyone who was at the rally would tell you the same thing. People got an opportunity to open their hearts to the people around them and share exactly what they're feeling without being judged. We will continue to have these peaceful rallies. And we are NOT condoning violence, rioting, or any type of disrespect towards trump or his supporters. People are saying that we don't have the power to make a difference and we are running on false hope. I can assure you that we CAN change things. Don't believe everything the news says. This is being televised as a "trump protest" but the news vans were guarded from coming into the school. Therefore they are putting info on the news based on rumors. We will keep on going. Estamos Unidos.




posted on Nov, 12 2016 @ 07:20 AM
link   
a reply to: KWAKMUSIC

Kris,
Thanks for the post, I don't think anyone thought this was a Trump event. One person here thinks that there is a question to what was said in social media, and that the fight was somewhat justified.

I don't give a sweet crap about what was said on social media, the violence is wrong and I would hope the victim is going to press charges and the assailant spends some time in whatever is age appropriate jail/Juvenal home.



posted on Nov, 12 2016 @ 09:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: SaturnFX
I guess your line of reasoning will get you out of jury duty. well done

So, trials are not about what actually happened?



posted on Nov, 12 2016 @ 09:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: seasonal
One person here thinks that there is a question to what was said in social media, and that the fight was somewhat justified.

Don't put words in peoples mouths. It was two of us that said that human reaction to something said is normal and to be expected although not a justification or excuse for violence.

ETA: To be honest, I don't have a problem with violence. The freedoms that citizens of the US and other free nations enjoy did not come to be without it. In some situations it is not just the only way but the correct way. This may not be one of those situations but to think that violence is never the answer is naive.


edit on 12-11-2016 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 12 2016 @ 09:37 AM
link   
a reply to: daskakik




Don't put words in peoples mouths. It was two of us that said that human reaction to something said is normal and to be expected although not a justification or excuse for violence.

Wow,
I think we are on the same page. No matter what was written, that is no justification for violence.

That took a while, but we are on the same page....



posted on Nov, 12 2016 @ 09:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: seasonal
Wow,
I think we are on the same page. No matter what was written, that is no justification for violence.

That took a while, but we are on the same page....

You're kind of slow because that is what MagicCow said on page one and I have been saying for pages about "this" situation.

Although, there is a caveat, sometimes there is justification. Maybe not in this case but in any case the facts determine that.



edit on 12-11-2016 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 12 2016 @ 09:48 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Nov, 12 2016 @ 09:51 AM
link   
a reply to: daskakik




You're kind of slow because that is what MagicCow said on page one and I have been saying for pages about "this" situation.

Although, there is a caveat, sometimes there is justification. Maybe not in this case but in any case the facts determine that.


Gosh, I'll try to keep up.


If this justification does not apply to this situation, why on earth the back and forth? Let it go, you agree with the level headed logically based people here on ATS....



posted on Nov, 12 2016 @ 09:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: seasonal
If this justification does not apply to this situation, why on earth the back and forth? Let it go, you agree with the level headed logically based people here on ATS....

Because there is another point of view to discuss it from. One where the victims actions do carry responsibility.

The back and forth is about the automatic application, by you, of a "violence is never justified" excuse which is also not true.
edit on 12-11-2016 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 12 2016 @ 09:56 AM
link   
a reply to: daskakik



Because there is another point of view to discuss it from. One where the victims actions do carry responsibility.

The back and forth is about the automatic application, by you, of a "violence is never justified" excuse which is not true.

Never said violence isn't justified.

And you have the option of starting a thread to discuss your point of views, that are in line with mine.



posted on Nov, 12 2016 @ 10:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: seasonal
Never said violence isn't justified.

And you have the option of starting a thread to discuss your point of views, that are in line with mine.

Actually they are not in line with yours. I am merely acknowledging the context. At the same time I'm saying that it isn't the only context.

Why start another thread when my point is about the context of your OP?



posted on Nov, 12 2016 @ 10:10 AM
link   
a reply to: daskakik




Actually they are not in line with yours. I am merely acknowledging the context. At the same time I'm saying that it isn't the only context.

Why start another thread when my point is about the context of your OP?


Your point is about a piece of information that the story covers.

She wrote that she was pro trump, sparking the attack.

Now your argument is a "what if", what if she wrote something "offensive" then the assault is a little justified.

Your point is is as valid as what she had for lunch sparking the assault.



posted on Nov, 12 2016 @ 10:12 AM
link   
Not sure why my last post was removed due to avoiding 'thread drift' DrumsRfun...it was BANG on topic and pertinent to what happened to the Girl who's family presumably voted for President Elect Trump, at the hands of another Girl who presumably has parents that did not vote for him...

Quite clearly, for the attacking girl to have such vitriol to attack another simply for her perfectly reasonable political beliefs, is telling of what kinds of things are being said in the attacking Girl's home.

Therefore, it is a telling example of the way at least some Democrats behave when others don''t share the same Political point of view as themselves...they resort to violence, ergo...non-democratic but rather tyrannical POV.

That's all i said, are you saying that point of view is not valid, in such a topic about intollerence of other people's political point of view?

That would be too ironic mate.

edit on 12 11 2016 by MysterX because: typo



posted on Nov, 12 2016 @ 10:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: seasonal
Your point is about a piece of information that the story covers.

So you are now telling me what my point is?


She wrote that she was pro trump, sparking the attack.

We don't know that. Everything else after that is baseless.


Now your argument is a "what if", what if she wrote something "offensive" then the assault is a little justified.

Not justified but to be expected. Bet you anything you want she will think twice about what she posts from now on.

The point is that the real world isn't some academic debate on what is right or wrong.



posted on Nov, 12 2016 @ 10:15 AM
link   
a reply to: MysterX




Not sure why my last post was removed due to avoiding 'thread drift' DrumsRfun...it was BANG on topic and pertinent to what happened to the Girl who voted for President Elect Trump, at the hands of another Girl who presumably has parents that did not vote for him...

Quite clearly, for the attacking girl to have such vitriol to attack another simply for her perfectly reasonable political beliefs, is telling of what kinds of things are being said in the attacking Girl's home.

Therefore, it is a telling example of the way at least some Democrats behave when others don''t share the same Political point of view as themselves...they resort to violence, ergo...non-democratic but rather tyrannical POV.

That's all i said, are you saying that point of view is not valid, in such a topic about intollerence of other people's political point of view?

That would be too ironic mate.


Well said, didn't seem like thread drift.



posted on Nov, 12 2016 @ 10:17 AM
link   
a reply to: daskakik

What was written was covered, you seem to have a blind spot in your reading.



posted on Nov, 12 2016 @ 10:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: seasonal
What was written was covered, you seem to have a blind spot in your reading.

No, the report about what was written, was covered. There is a difference.

ETA: Who knows what else may have been said by the girl outside of Instagram. You are blind to every other variable.



edit on 12-11-2016 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 12 2016 @ 10:21 AM
link   
a reply to: daskakik




No what was reported about what was written was covered. There is a difference.


correct, finally.



posted on Nov, 12 2016 @ 10:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: seasonal
correct, finally.

Finally what? For pages, I've been saying that you have been going off of incomplete info because you are only going off of what was reported.


edit on 12-11-2016 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 12 2016 @ 10:27 AM
link   
a reply to: daskakik

I see you amended your comment, should have left it, you had it correct.




top topics



 
25
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join