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.

 

Delusional Protesters and Their Delusional Protests

page: 4
90
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 3 2017 @ 09:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
a reply to: underwerks

...something about footwear of the appropriate size being donned goes here...

 


a reply to: underwerks


I'm fully insured, ...


Are you absolutely sure about that?

I'd take a closer look at all your policies paying special attention to the exclusion clauses; protip, look for the terms, "riot, strike, and/or civil strife."

You might not be as covered as you think you are. Just like all of these businesses and individuals who have had collateral damage visited upon them.

If that's the case, then so be it. The off chance something of mine might get destroyed in social unrest is no reason for me to support silencing other people's protest.

But then again, I've been handling firearms since I was a kid growing up in the country, so I defend my home against anything like that. As I would hope others would too.


There is the issue of the "heckler's veto". Do you believe an unruly mob should be able to silence someone's fundamental human rights?




posted on Feb, 3 2017 @ 10:03 PM
link   
a reply to: underwerks

What about other peoples fundamental rights to walk down the street without morons attacking them? Or parking their car near the store without having to wonder if it's going to be there when they get back?

Do those rights matter?



posted on Feb, 3 2017 @ 10:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
a reply to: underwerks

...something about footwear of the appropriate size being donned goes here...

 


a reply to: underwerks


I'm fully insured, ...


Are you absolutely sure about that?

I'd take a closer look at all your policies paying special attention to the exclusion clauses; protip, look for the terms, "riot, strike, and/or civil strife."

You might not be as covered as you think you are. Just like all of these businesses and individuals who have had collateral damage visited upon them.

If that's the case, then so be it. The off chance something of mine might get destroyed in social unrest is no reason for me to support silencing other people's protest.

But then again, I've been handling firearms since I was a kid growing up in the country, so I defend my home against anything like that. As I would hope others would too.


There is the issue of the "heckler's veto". Do you believe an unruly mob should be able to silence someone's fundamental human rights?

No, not at all. But I have to question the motivations of anyone who allows their opinion to be silenced by heckling.



posted on Feb, 3 2017 @ 10:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
a reply to: underwerks

...something about footwear of the appropriate size being donned goes here...

 


a reply to: underwerks


I'm fully insured, ...


Are you absolutely sure about that?

I'd take a closer look at all your policies paying special attention to the exclusion clauses; protip, look for the terms, "riot, strike, and/or civil strife."

You might not be as covered as you think you are. Just like all of these businesses and individuals who have had collateral damage visited upon them.

If that's the case, then so be it. The off chance something of mine might get destroyed in social unrest is no reason for me to support silencing other people's protest.

But then again, I've been handling firearms since I was a kid growing up in the country, so I defend my home against anything like that. As I would hope others would too.


There is the issue of the "heckler's veto". Do you believe an unruly mob should be able to silence someone's fundamental human rights?

No, not at all. But I have to question the motivations of anyone who allows their opinion to be silenced by heckling.


I think it is quite rational to self-censor one's own opinion in order to save his own skin or the skin of others. The true culprits, of course, are the ones threatening or coercing one to do so.



posted on Feb, 3 2017 @ 10:20 PM
link   
a reply to: underwerks

Self preservation has a marvelous tendency to do that. Always has.

I question the motivations of anyone who uses intimidation to silence the opposition. ...and that is what these "protests" are. Blatant attempts at intimidation.

This isn't descent. This is criminal activity. Once property is damaged, any first amendment rights disappear.
edit on 2/3/2017 by seagull because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 3 2017 @ 10:21 PM
link   
a reply to: underwerks




As for the protests, let them protest. If some private property gets burned or damaged, it's just property. Free speech is more important than property. If you don't agree with that, then what's the alternative? Take away some more of our rights because something might happen while expressing those rights?


I am not sure you have a firm grasp of what it is you are going on about !

You are advocating that it is ok to riot and destroy private citizens property because of your right to free speech, let me spell this out for you in simple layman's terms ...You have the right to free speech but not to destroy other peoples property....

Somehow somewhere there you have managed to get confused between the two, by advocating destroying peoples property as a way of protest makes you part of the problem that the OP addresses quite eloquently, and sadly you cannot see that you are the problem and borderline domestic terrorist .



posted on Feb, 3 2017 @ 10:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: seagull
a reply to: underwerks

What about other peoples fundamental rights to walk down the street without morons attacking them? Or parking their car near the store without having to wonder if it's going to be there when they get back?

Do those rights matter?

Those aren't constitutionally protected rights. Freedom of speech and by extension protesting is.

Where do you live where you don't have to worry about your car getting taken from you or something happening? I'm not about trading imagined security for my rights. Or anyone else's.

Too many are flying out the window as is, and I'll be damned if I support the taking of any more. Under anyone's banner.

What's the solution? Fill me in if you know. All I know is criminalizing this aspect of free speech is wrong. Even if its messy and outrages you, it serves its purpose to release the pressure valve.

Or would you rather have armed coups and insurrections, like how it is in so many countries that don't allow public expressions of political anger?



posted on Feb, 3 2017 @ 10:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
a reply to: underwerks

...something about footwear of the appropriate size being donned goes here...

 


a reply to: underwerks


I'm fully insured, ...


Are you absolutely sure about that?

I'd take a closer look at all your policies paying special attention to the exclusion clauses; protip, look for the terms, "riot, strike, and/or civil strife."

You might not be as covered as you think you are. Just like all of these businesses and individuals who have had collateral damage visited upon them.

If that's the case, then so be it. The off chance something of mine might get destroyed in social unrest is no reason for me to support silencing other people's protest.

But then again, I've been handling firearms since I was a kid growing up in the country, so I defend my home against anything like that. As I would hope others would too.


There is the issue of the "heckler's veto". Do you believe an unruly mob should be able to silence someone's fundamental human rights?

No, not at all. But I have to question the motivations of anyone who allows their opinion to be silenced by heckling.


I think it is quite rational to self-censor one's own opinion in order to save his own skin or the skin of others. The true culprits, of course, are the ones threatening or coercing one to do so.

It may be rational, but it isn't honest.



posted on Feb, 3 2017 @ 10:36 PM
link   
a reply to: underwerks

Protesting without damaging public or private property? Rock on.

Once damage occurs by deliberate intent? Nope.

There are certain laws that cover the damage, by intent, caused by riots. Riots, not protests.

A protest is a bunch of people standing around hootin' and hollerin' about an issue near and dear to their hearts. Whatever the issue.

A riot is those same bunch of people deciding that instead of the aforementioned hootin' and hollerin', it'd be cool to start destroying peoples property.

That seems to be OK with you. Someone destroys my property, or threatens my safety, because First Amendment. Very tolerant of you. So long as you agree with the premise of their "protesting", I'm guessing. If you don't, I also guess, you'll change your tune with great alacrity.


edit on 2/3/2017 by seagull because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 3 2017 @ 10:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

That's the sort of imagery that the left needs to ruminate on, before the set their own towns and people ablaze. It won't be long before someone is killed.


People already have been, and not just in Dallas/Baton Rogue.



posted on Feb, 3 2017 @ 10:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
a reply to: underwerks

...something about footwear of the appropriate size being donned goes here...

 


a reply to: underwerks


I'm fully insured, ...


Are you absolutely sure about that?

I'd take a closer look at all your policies paying special attention to the exclusion clauses; protip, look for the terms, "riot, strike, and/or civil strife."

You might not be as covered as you think you are. Just like all of these businesses and individuals who have had collateral damage visited upon them.

If that's the case, then so be it. The off chance something of mine might get destroyed in social unrest is no reason for me to support silencing other people's protest.

But then again, I've been handling firearms since I was a kid growing up in the country, so I defend my home against anything like that. As I would hope others would too.


There is the issue of the "heckler's veto". Do you believe an unruly mob should be able to silence someone's fundamental human rights?

No, not at all. But I have to question the motivations of anyone who allows their opinion to be silenced by heckling.


I think it is quite rational to self-censor one's own opinion in order to save his own skin or the skin of others. The true culprits, of course, are the ones threatening or coercing one to do so.

It may be rational, but it isn't honest.


Protesting is not honest. It is public relations.



posted on Feb, 3 2017 @ 10:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
a reply to: underwerks

...something about footwear of the appropriate size being donned goes here...

 


a reply to: underwerks


I'm fully insured, ...


Are you absolutely sure about that?

I'd take a closer look at all your policies paying special attention to the exclusion clauses; protip, look for the terms, "riot, strike, and/or civil strife."

You might not be as covered as you think you are. Just like all of these businesses and individuals who have had collateral damage visited upon them.

If that's the case, then so be it. The off chance something of mine might get destroyed in social unrest is no reason for me to support silencing other people's protest.

But then again, I've been handling firearms since I was a kid growing up in the country, so I defend my home against anything like that. As I would hope others would too.


There is the issue of the "heckler's veto". Do you believe an unruly mob should be able to silence someone's fundamental human rights?

No, not at all. But I have to question the motivations of anyone who allows their opinion to be silenced by heckling.


I think it is quite rational to self-censor one's own opinion in order to save his own skin or the skin of others. The true culprits, of course, are the ones threatening or coercing one to do so.

It may be rational, but it isn't honest.


Protesting is not honest. It is public relations.

Don't be obtuse

edit on 3-2-2017 by underwerks because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 3 2017 @ 10:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
a reply to: underwerks

...something about footwear of the appropriate size being donned goes here...

 


a reply to: underwerks


I'm fully insured, ...


Are you absolutely sure about that?

I'd take a closer look at all your policies paying special attention to the exclusion clauses; protip, look for the terms, "riot, strike, and/or civil strife."

You might not be as covered as you think you are. Just like all of these businesses and individuals who have had collateral damage visited upon them.

If that's the case, then so be it. The off chance something of mine might get destroyed in social unrest is no reason for me to support silencing other people's protest.

But then again, I've been handling firearms since I was a kid growing up in the country, so I defend my home against anything like that. As I would hope others would too.


There is the issue of the "heckler's veto". Do you believe an unruly mob should be able to silence someone's fundamental human rights?

No, not at all. But I have to question the motivations of anyone who allows their opinion to be silenced by heckling.


I think it is quite rational to self-censor one's own opinion in order to save his own skin or the skin of others. The true culprits, of course, are the ones threatening or coercing one to do so.

It may be rational, but it isn't honest.


Protesting is not honest. It is public relations.

Don't be obtuse


What else does protesting accomplish?



posted on Feb, 3 2017 @ 10:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: seagull
a reply to: underwerks

Protesting without damaging public or private property? Rock on.

Once damage occurs by deliberate intent? Nope.

There are certain laws that cover the damage, by intent, caused by riots. Riots, not protests.

A protest is a bunch of people standing around hootin' and hollerin' about an issue near and dear to their hearts. Whatever the issue.

A riot is those same bunch of people deciding that instead of the aforementioned hootin' and hollerin', it'd be cool to start destroying peoples property.

That seems to be OK with you. Someone destroys my property, or threatens my safety, because First Amendment. Very tolerant of you. So long as you agree with the premise of their "protesting", I'm guessing. If you don't, I also guess, you'll change your tune with great alacrity.


I think you'll find if you look at it that the majority of people at any given protest don't support destruction of property.

But, as in every large group of anyone, there will always be a few that want to burn and loot. That's not a political thing, its an evolved monkey human thing. Clamping down on free speech to stop the few idiots that abuse it isn't the solution.



posted on Feb, 3 2017 @ 10:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: underwerks



You can't expect people to bow to an administration that blatantly lies every week. Especially if they weren't fans of it in the first place.

I understand wanting to give Trump a chance, but he's not giving us a chance to give him a chance. Its one thing after another.

My advice to the Trump admin: stop making #### up. Then maybe some of us would take you seriously.


This administration is the most transparent administration in American history. You only know they lie because they are not in the business of public relations that you were used to.


That's quite a claim there. Especially only a few weeks in. Care to back that up?

edit on 3-2-2017 by Quetzalcoatl14 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 3 2017 @ 11:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
a reply to: underwerks

...something about footwear of the appropriate size being donned goes here...

 


a reply to: underwerks


I'm fully insured, ...


Are you absolutely sure about that?

I'd take a closer look at all your policies paying special attention to the exclusion clauses; protip, look for the terms, "riot, strike, and/or civil strife."

You might not be as covered as you think you are. Just like all of these businesses and individuals who have had collateral damage visited upon them.

If that's the case, then so be it. The off chance something of mine might get destroyed in social unrest is no reason for me to support silencing other people's protest.

But then again, I've been handling firearms since I was a kid growing up in the country, so I defend my home against anything like that. As I would hope others would too.


There is the issue of the "heckler's veto". Do you believe an unruly mob should be able to silence someone's fundamental human rights?

No, not at all. But I have to question the motivations of anyone who allows their opinion to be silenced by heckling.


I think it is quite rational to self-censor one's own opinion in order to save his own skin or the skin of others. The true culprits, of course, are the ones threatening or coercing one to do so.

It may be rational, but it isn't honest.


Protesting is not honest. It is public relations.

Don't be obtuse


What else does protesting accomplish?

Look at the history of the United States. What hasn't it accomplished given enough support? Civil disobedience is the American way, and I'm proud I'm not sent to Alaska because of what I think.



posted on Feb, 3 2017 @ 11:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: RickyD
a reply to: underwerks

What administration doesn't lie to us day in and day out? Was Obama transparent and truthful with us? Hell did the words he spoke to us even come from himself or did he have a team of people writing every line to be fed to us...After some think-tank analyzed what we wanted to hear most. Not just Obama either...I can remember no president that was honest with us and had our best intentions as a country at heart. None I was alive for anyway. So what's the real reason you wrote what you said in your post, because what I read drips of hypocrisy...Hate trump for the same things all presidents do. At least he addresses us on Twitter in his own words.


I'm sorry, if you think that Trump is the answer to that, I feel bad for you, not mad.

You guys have bought the bull hook, line and sinker.

I'm not saying Clinton was the answer by the way, either.

Mark my words, Trump will not be the change this country needed, nor wanted.



posted on Feb, 3 2017 @ 11:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: underwerks



You can't expect people to bow to an administration that blatantly lies every week. Especially if they weren't fans of it in the first place.

I understand wanting to give Trump a chance, but he's not giving us a chance to give him a chance. Its one thing after another.

My advice to the Trump admin: stop making #### up. Then maybe some of us would take you seriously.


This administration is the most transparent administration in American history. You only know they lie because they are not in the business of public relations that you were used to.


That's quite a claim there. Especially only a few weeks in. Care to back that up?


We know the thoughts of the US president because he speaks his mind. He has put into works the very things he said he would during the campaign, give or take. The administration has received more scrutiny from media than any other, and it is only two weeks in.



posted on Feb, 3 2017 @ 11:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
a reply to: underwerks

...something about footwear of the appropriate size being donned goes here...

 


a reply to: underwerks


I'm fully insured, ...


Are you absolutely sure about that?

I'd take a closer look at all your policies paying special attention to the exclusion clauses; protip, look for the terms, "riot, strike, and/or civil strife."

You might not be as covered as you think you are. Just like all of these businesses and individuals who have had collateral damage visited upon them.

If that's the case, then so be it. The off chance something of mine might get destroyed in social unrest is no reason for me to support silencing other people's protest.

But then again, I've been handling firearms since I was a kid growing up in the country, so I defend my home against anything like that. As I would hope others would too.


There is the issue of the "heckler's veto". Do you believe an unruly mob should be able to silence someone's fundamental human rights?

No, not at all. But I have to question the motivations of anyone who allows their opinion to be silenced by heckling.


I think it is quite rational to self-censor one's own opinion in order to save his own skin or the skin of others. The true culprits, of course, are the ones threatening or coercing one to do so.

It may be rational, but it isn't honest.


Protesting is not honest. It is public relations.

Don't be obtuse


What else does protesting accomplish?

Look at the history of the United States. What hasn't it accomplished given enough support? Civil disobedience is the American way, and I'm proud I'm not sent to Alaska because of what I think.


I was asking you what protests accomplish besides public relations.



posted on Feb, 3 2017 @ 11:10 PM
link   



LesMis


I can understand the questions about the generalized protests.

However, there are real protests against the targeting of the seven countries for travel restrictions or screening.

My dear friend has family split across the US and Sudan. She is Sudanese, but a citizen. Her parents though, live one there and one here, but aren't citizens. They are all deeply concerned. She's also very well educated and has an ivy league master degree in international affairs. So she is far from uniformed.

Not only that, but the targeting of some of those countries were questionable, and the way it was done questionable. Why not Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, or Afghanistan, all three with ties to terror. You know, like 911?

Can you see this, that at least on this topic people have serious concerns and questions?
edit on 3-2-2017 by Quetzalcoatl14 because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
90
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join