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

Wanted: Best/Worst Examples of Bannon's Racism/Misogyny/Homophobia etc.

page: 4
17
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 23 2016 @ 11:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: Darkmadness
a reply to: underwerks

Do you have any actual examples?

Of Bannon himself? No, not at all. Did you even read my post? Whether he comes out and explicitly says racist things doesn't matter when he's giving white nationalists a platform to insert their ideas into regular conservative talking points. That's the danger with Bannon. Not him personally, but the people he brings with him down his path to legitimacy. Anyone toting that type of baggage shouldn't have a position of influence with the president.




posted on Nov, 23 2016 @ 11:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: VP740
a reply to: Boadicea

It seems in line with what Theantediluvian is saying, though it gives some extra details and has opposite bias from Theantediluvian.

Thank you -- that helps and gives me something to think about.


On the Hanukkah books for instance; the school didn't think his question was racist. They thought he was asking: if this school is so secular, why are there so many religious books?


That was the impression I got after reading about a little more about it.



posted on Nov, 23 2016 @ 11:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian
The accusations that Bannon is a antisemite stem from statements of his wife during their divorce/custody fight.

Anti-Semitic Trump campaign CEO Stephen Bannon not a big fan of ‘whiny brat’ Jews, ex-wife says


Mary Louise Piccard said in a 2007 court declaration that Bannon didn't want their twin daughters attending the Archer School for Girls in Los Angeles because many Jewish students were enrolled at the elite institution.

"The biggest problem he had with Archer is the number of Jews that attend," Piccard said in her statement signed on June 27, 2007.

"He said that he doesn't like the way they raise their kids to be 'whiny brats' and that he didn't want the girls going to school with Jews," Piccard wrote.

"I told him that there are children who are Jewish at (a competing school), and he asked me what the percentage was. I told him that I didn't know because it wasn't an issue for me as I am not raising the girls to be either anti-Semitic or prejudiced against anyone," she wrote.

Bannon asked his ex-wife if it bothered her that a second school, the Willows Community School, used to be a Temple.

And while checking out yet another school, Bannon asked the director during a sit down why there were “so many Chanukah books in the library.”


Always trust the ex-wife to give the "truth" especially when lying gets them more alimony.
Anti-semites often make it a practice to open a bureau in Israel.



posted on Nov, 23 2016 @ 11:56 AM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian


That has little to do with anything in my opinion but a recent trend during this election. Trump supporters have taken to referring to themselves as the "Alt-Right" because they've been unwittingly rubbing elbows with the actual Alt-Right. This distinction you speak of is a new development. Essentially people started calling themselves "Alt-Right" about the same time that Clinton gave her "Alt-Right" speech and then after realizing what it referred to, have tried to redefine the term.


We seem to agree that the definitions have been blurred and/or may re-defined, but don't quite see eye-to-eye on the whys and wherefores. The "distinction" I speak of is what has been currently blurred into the "Alternative Right" with the "alt-right." They did not start out the same. That is the new development, and I would attribute it to Hillary's campaign -- and subsequently embraced by others for various purposes.

I would say that both the left in general and the White Supremacists/Nationalists -- two extremes -- both benefit by identifying the "Alternative Right" with the "alt-right." I would also suggest that there are various reasons for Trump supporters to adopt the "alt-right" moniker, including the best one of all: The Trump right is a very different creature than the mainstream right -- which by definition makes it the alternative right. It's unfair to assign one motive to a very diverse group of people.

There's much to consider in the rest of your comment, but I'm going to have to read it again and ponder it all a bit!



posted on Nov, 23 2016 @ 11:58 AM
link   
a reply to: Boadicea

What is the point of this quote?



posted on Nov, 23 2016 @ 12:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: Darkmadness
a reply to: underwerks

Do you have any actual examples?

Of Bannon himself? No, not at all. Did you even read my post? Whether he comes out and explicitly says racist things doesn't matter when he's giving white nationalists a platform to insert their ideas into regular conservative talking points. That's the danger with Bannon. Not him personally, but the people he brings with him down his path to legitimacy. Anyone toting that type of baggage shouldn't have a position of influence with the president.


It's a smear tactic. Call someone a racist with no hard evidence and let them defend himself in the court of public opinion. You can say the same for Obama or Clinton with anti-Americans, racist, Communists, Marxists, etc.. Except with them, there's a direct link and plenty of evidence. There's nothing even close to that on Bannon. It's a joke and people follow the narrative like a bunch of parrots. The media is still in campaign mode.



posted on Nov, 23 2016 @ 12:06 PM
link   
a reply to: underwerks

Very well said -- and I cannot argue with any of it. This does bother me greatly. Especially because I can see how their issues (and preferred solutions) could overlap; but neither Bannon nor Breitbart take the time or effort to really draw important distinctions in their positions, much less solutions... which makes one wonder if there really are any distinctions.

I don't want to digress too much from the OP, but for example, someone worried about Muslim terrorists gaining entry to our nation would have common ground with someone who doesn't want any Muslims at all allowed in the nation. So the latter would obviously support (to one extent or another) the former in efforts to ban any Muslims as better than banning no Muslims, but really still wanting to ban all Muslims. So it is, I believe, simply good judgment to not just note their differences, but to also emphasize their differences. I don't see that happening.



posted on Nov, 23 2016 @ 12:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: Darkmadness
a reply to: underwerks

Do you have any actual examples?

Of Bannon himself? No, not at all. Did you even read my post? Whether he comes out and explicitly says racist things doesn't matter when he's giving white nationalists a platform to insert their ideas into regular conservative talking points. That's the danger with Bannon. Not him personally, but the people he brings with him down his path to legitimacy. Anyone toting that type of baggage shouldn't have a position of influence with the president.


Wow. Just apply that same idea to a single black man and you'd never hear the end of it. Baggage? The only baggage Bannon carries is all the crap people are trying to tie him to with no evidence. Guilty until deemed innocent, average American political character assassination, it's really getting old.



posted on Nov, 23 2016 @ 12:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: mkultra11

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: Darkmadness
a reply to: underwerks

Do you have any actual examples?

Of Bannon himself? No, not at all. Did you even read my post? Whether he comes out and explicitly says racist things doesn't matter when he's giving white nationalists a platform to insert their ideas into regular conservative talking points. That's the danger with Bannon. Not him personally, but the people he brings with him down his path to legitimacy. Anyone toting that type of baggage shouldn't have a position of influence with the president.


It's a smear tactic. Call someone a racist with no hard evidence and let them defend himself in the court of public opinion. You can say the same for Obama or Clinton with anti-Americans, racist, Communists, Marxists, etc.. Except with them, there's a direct link and plenty of evidence. There's nothing even close to that on Bannon. It's a joke and people follow the narrative like a bunch of parrots. The media is still in campaign mode.

It's not a smear tactic. Research any of the names on my first post, got to Breitbart and watch the interview with Bannon and Richwine. All the evidence of what I said is right in front of you if you care to look.

This isn't your grandfathers type of racism and bigotry, it's updated and intellectualized to appeal to modern conservatives and hidden behind positions conservatives parrot around. The conservatives who aren't racist are being used by the ones who influence right wing media. If I was a conservative, I'd be angry about that.

You can try to do some impartial research, or you can blindly follow Trump and his appointments like so many here do.



posted on Nov, 23 2016 @ 12:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: VP740
a reply to: Boadicea

What is the point of this quote?


Um... I'm clueless! I don't even know what quote you're referring to!!!

You're going to have to spell it out for me or draw me a picture or sumpin!



posted on Nov, 23 2016 @ 12:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: Boadicea


originally posted by: VP740
a reply to: Boadicea

It seems in line with what Theantediluvian is saying, though it gives some extra details and has opposite bias from Theantediluvian.

Thank you -- that helps and gives me something to think about.


On the Hanukkah books for instance; the school didn't think his question was racist. They thought he was asking: if this school is so secular, why are there so many religious books?


That was the impression I got after reading about a little more about it.



posted on Nov, 23 2016 @ 12:19 PM
link   



posted on Nov, 23 2016 @ 12:33 PM
link   
a reply to: MotherMayEye

I thoroughly agree with you, but you really needn't defend the millions of Trump voters. Actually, I'd guess its an utterly pointless effort, but its nice of you to try. His opinion that all Trump voters are "FOR" racism is borne of buy-in to the white privilege construct invented by people who hate white people, pure and simple. See, they detested white people long before this election. Trumps election just gives them the cover to publicly espouse their vitriol and to spew their hate. My wife and I were insulted by two leftist Hispanics in the grocery store yesterday. My wife, bless her soul didn't understand it and I refuse to respond, I refuse to engage such people and that genuinely enrages them which is precisely what I hope to achieve.

The odd thing about this election for me is two fold. One is that since Hilary won the popular vote it tells me that a majority of "Americans" favor Hilary's positions. So for me, I've come to realize that my "prejudice" is less about race than it is that I've come to realize that I'm not in agreement with most Americans which means that I'm becoming more and more anti-American. The other thing I've come to realize is that since Hilary won the popular vote, maybe it is time to do away with the electoral college. Problem is, that if you look at the map of this election, blue/red, the red Trump support states account for 85% of the land mass of the US, but only 46% of the vote in this election. If you abolish the electoral college, you essentially disenfranchise the bulk of American land owners. And, you would find yourself in a one-party State type government with the leftists controlling every branch of media, the entire educational system and all of the Media outlets. You would wake up in the USSSR!



posted on Nov, 23 2016 @ 12:57 PM
link   
a reply to: VP740

I know I'm missing something here.... I don't understand why you are asking me to tell you the point of your own quote.

Other than what it obviously says -- basically pointing out two sides to the same coin -- it means nothing more or less to me.



posted on Nov, 23 2016 @ 01:01 PM
link   
Anytime that anted guy talks it's like Listening to Charlie Browns teacher. What a joke.



posted on Nov, 23 2016 @ 01:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Boadicea

Well, I know what I said, I'm just wondering why you posted that section of it. Usually when people quote someone else's post they have a comment or question about it. Why did you feel that needed to be repeated? Did you accidentally post that without realizing it or something?
edit on 23-11-2016 by VP740 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 23 2016 @ 01:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: VP740
a reply to: Boadicea

Well, I know what I said, I'm just wondering why you posted that section of it. Usually when people quote someone else's post they have a comment or question about it. Why did you feel that needed to be repeated? Did you accidentally post that without realizing it or something?


Okay -- Gotcha!

Give me a few minutes to go back and see if I can figure out what I was thinking... or if I wasn't thinking!



posted on Nov, 23 2016 @ 01:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Boadicea

OK! I'll be back later.



posted on Nov, 23 2016 @ 01:58 PM
link   
a reply to: VP740

Okay... I figured it out... and color me embarrassed!!! I totally and completely screwed up the formatting there, and completely lost my response to you. Sheesh Bo! What a rookie mistake, eh?

The comment I made was to the effect that perspective is everything. Once I read up a little on the Hanukkah books comment, I agreed that it seemed just as likely to be about why a secular school would have so many books about religion in general, much less a specific religion. Not that he was necessarily questioning one religion over any others.

P.S. Thanks for your patience!
edit on 23-11-2016 by Boadicea because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 23 2016 @ 02:56 PM
link   
a reply to: Boadicea

My suggestion was that Trump supporters might want to adopt something that isn't already in use. "Trump Republicans" seems to line up well with historic precedent. Of course, there's always "Trumpkins"



new topics

top topics



 
17
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join