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.

 

The SJWFRONT has declared open war in their New Inquisition.

page: 16
48
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 01:40 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik

If you can't even describe them, you're too incompetent on the subject for this discussion.

If you want to understand, read my posts in this thread.

I highly doubt you could find more on point deep analysis of them for this kind of topic i any other single spot.
edit on 16-2-2017 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 01:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: AboveBoard

originally posted by: LSU0408

originally posted by: AboveBoard

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: AboveBoard



Violence and threats for political coercion.

Not violence OR threats OR politics OR saying things other people disagree with. Got it.





Are you sure you got it??? Because that definition describes all these protesters and rioters to a tee.


No, it does NOT describe the hundreds of thousands of peaceful protestors. It describes a handful of primitive weapon wielding misfits in Berkeley.



These violent protests have extended way further than Berkeley. You could go as far as to say Madonna is a terrorist after she announced that she had thoughts of blowing up the white house. I believe that march was the only one so far that hasn't been violent unless I'm missing something.



posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 01:44 PM
link   
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

I didn't say I couldn't, I said I didn't need to, although not in those words.



posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 01:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: daskakik
originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
Hazardous wouldn't answer the questions. Now will you?????

I'll give it a shot.



originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

I didn't say I couldn't, I said I didn't need to, although not in those words.


Translation: 'I dont know.'


edit on 16-2-2017 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 01:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: AboveBoard
I am appalled and officially done with this violence inciting thread that seeks to demonize "all those protestors" and the political left in general, and turn them into the "nu-nazis" worthy of being treated like terrorists, because what?


Because YOU can't defend their violence so you just excuse it, and mainly because they fit this definition:

terrorist - a person who uses unlawful violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.

Anyone that can't admit these violent protesters fit that mold are terrorist apologists. Plain and simple.



posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 01:53 PM
link   
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

No translation needed.

You asked what it meant and I said that it meant what everybody already knows, the 20th-century German Nazi Party. Nobody needs that explained to them.

What is your point in asking? Even if they do have similarities they are still not Nazis.



posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 01:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: everyone

So the occasional "i dont condone it" doesn't do it for you, huh?

Both sides do the same thing. This thread is an example of that and I don't see too many posting "i dont condone it" here either.

Just pointing out the color of both pot and kettle.




No both sides don't do the same thing. When was the last time you saw Conservatives rioting and protesting and shutting down free speech at a college because they didn't care for the views of the speaker?



posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 01:56 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik

The "20th-century German Nazi Party" are long dead.

Here we're talking about SJW's labelling their opposition "Nazi's" "Fascists" and condoning violence etc against all these "Nazi's" / "Fascists".



posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 01:57 PM
link   
a reply to: LSU0408

The magnitude of those things might differ but both sides let things slide and they paint the other side with a broad brush when a part of it acts up.

So, yeah, both sides do the same thing.



posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 01:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: LSU0408

originally posted by: everyone

originally posted by: DreamerOracle
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

I wonder
13-16 years from now, other than my struggle to survive... what will warm my heart the most
this post and the people with a similar ethos... Don't get me wrong I wish you no ill but...

Knowing that you probably died eating some of the words in your thread...

Warms the heart... Just so you know.

I'd like to thank you for making my future survival efforts more rewarding... Sadistic? Sad? nope just plain old foresight.


P.s I flagged your post as a token gesture
of gratitude.


Well... i have to say.. you certainly would be scrapped of my list of potential babysitters followed by being put on my list of people with a restraining order around the entire area that i live in.

You
Creep
The
Hell
Out
Of
Anyone


Yeah that was really weird... I'm surprised that post stayed up.


Rules have definitely been relaxed.



posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 01:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
The "20th-century German Nazi Party" are long dead.

Yes they are.


Here we're talking about SJW's labelling their opposition "Nazi's" "Fascists" and condoning violence etc against all these "Nazi's" / "Fascists".

So? You said it yourself, there are neo-nazis. These people still uphold Nazi ideals.

Besides, what does the SJW choice of labels have to do with what you asked and how I answered?



posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 02:02 PM
link   
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Of course not! It's way too funny having you play the deer in the headlights with comprehension-issues. I mean... sorry and all that, but it's quite literally everything that little disinfo piece was about.

Wait... so you don't read anything else than your own postings? Kinda hazardous as it is, funny story though! Did you catch that drift now? *sigh*
Don't try to be so effing serious, it really doesn't suit your narrative.




posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 02:07 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik

Hazardous kept saying in that thread he rejoices when "Nazi's" get punched merely for being "Nazi's". I asked numerous questions challenging him on people getting punched (there was more in the thread, along the lines of if they're not actually intimidating anyone).

I posted much of that exchange here. You said you'd answer what he wouldn't, and now you're trollign the thread by saying you dont have to answer.

Here is the only answer we really need for this discussion:

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
I would define Neo-Nazi's as simply oppressive authoritarian hyper-tribalists.

And that's exactly what the SJWFRONT is.

Now if the conservatives were all in on making the Neo-Nazi cause a total national movement complete with mass scale ubiquitous social engineering (like the liberal hordes are widely embracing and running amok with the PC SJWFRONT), I'd be bare knuckle against the conservatives, too.


originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
Communism / Fascism / Nazism = different brands of more or less the same old oppressive authoritarian / totalitarian statist regimes.

All are scum. All for tribalist, statist, pro-censorship, pro-brutality, bigots, etc. Like SJW's.


You can work in the anti-Jew angle, and now you'll be describing Mainstream Global Islam just the same. But at the end its all just hyper-tribalism (just like with the Cult of PC).
edit on 16-2-2017 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 02:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: daskakik

Define Nazism.

Describe Nazism.

BTW: The Nazi's are gone. There are Neo-Nazi's, and they're a totally pariah fringe group... for now... lets keep it that way.

And tons of people are saying... are going around punching "Nazi's" / "Fascists" (which to the SJW's is everybody pro-trump anti-Hillary anti-Obama anti-SJW non-Liberal WHITE etc).


Did you see that moron on the Tucker Carlson show a couple nights ago? She said all right wingers are fascists because we try to shut down free speech and we're violent. When asked about the people at Berkeley who were violent and shutting down free speech, she said that wasn't fascism because they were exercising their rights by shutting down free speech. And this idiot is a middle school teacher. Not only that, but she was on video punching a guy because he was a Trump supporter.



posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 02:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
I posted much of that exchange here. You said you'd answer what he wouldn't, and now you're trollign the thread by saying you dont have to answer.

I did answer. You didn't seem to be satisfied with those answers. That really isn't my problem.

Your logical fallacies of re-defining nazism and then saying "look it fits" is BS.

That isn't trolling. That is calling out BS.



posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 02:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: LSU0408

The magnitude of those things might differ but both sides let things slide and they paint the other side with a broad brush when a part of it acts up.

So, yeah, both sides do the same thing.


Ok, but when was the last time you saw a violent protest by those on the right?



posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 02:17 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik

You didn't define / describe squat.

Across this thread I've defined and described them in depth; in various forms. Important here is what the ideology is (not who). In categorical social psychology terms I've defined that like you wont find anywhere else, and it's exactly the same as what the SJW movement is in social psychology / political science terms.

Now if you can actually speak to any of that then your being here would finally have a point. But dragging pointless nonsense on for pages on end that's usually the product of trolling.
edit on 16-2-2017 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 02:18 PM
link   
a reply to: LSU0408

I didn't see anyone post that clip. I haven't had TV in over a decade so I only ever see clips that people bother to post and I happen to notice.
edit on 16-2-2017 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 02:21 PM
link   
a reply to: LSU0408

I thought I was clear that I wasn't talking about that.



posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 02:25 PM
link   
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

What part of "it is already defined and the description stems from that" is giving you a hard time?


Across this thread I've defined and described them in depth; in various forms.

And then twist things to make it seem like the ideology (not the who) is what is important.

That's BS. I'm speaking to that.



new topics

top topics



 
48
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join