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: 17
48
<< 14  15  16    18  19 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 02:26 PM
link   
a reply to: iTruthSeeker

You don't know the meaning of hyperbole then. Or truth. or a great many other things, I'm sure.




posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 02:28 PM
link   
Spanish Inquisition


Censorship
As one manifestation of the Counter-Reformation, the Spanish Inquisition worked actively to impede the diffusion of heretical ideas in Spain by producing "Indexes" of prohibited books. Such lists of prohibited books were common in Europe a decade before the Inquisition published its first. The first Index published in Spain in 1551 was, in reality, a reprinting of the Index published by the University of Leuven in 1550, with an appendix dedicated to Spanish texts. Subsequent Indexes were published in 1559, 1583, 1612, 1632, and 1640. The Indexes included an enormous number of books of all types, though special attention was dedicated to religious works, and, particularly, vernacular translations of the Bible.

Included in the Indexes, at one point, were many of the great works of Spanish literature. Also, a number of religious writers who are today considered saints by the Catholic Church saw their works appear in the Indexes. At first, this might seem counter-intuitive or even nonsensical—how were these Spanish authors published in the first place if their texts were then prohibited by the Inquisition and placed in the Index? The answer lies in the process of publication and censorship in Early Modern Spain. Books in Early Modern Spain faced prepublication licensing and approval (which could include modification) by both secular and religious authorities. However, once approved and published, the circulating text also faced the possibility of post-hoc censorship by being denounced to the Inquisition—sometimes decades later. Likewise, as Catholic theology evolved, once-prohibited texts might be removed from the Index.

At first, inclusion in the Index meant total prohibition of a text; however, this proved not only impractical and unworkable, but also contrary to the goals of having a literate and well-educated clergy. Works with one line of suspect dogma would be prohibited in their entirety, despite the remainder of the text's sound dogma. In time, a compromise solution was adopted in which trusted Inquisition officials blotted out words, lines or whole passages of otherwise acceptable texts, thus allowing these expurgated editions to circulate. Although in theory the Indexes imposed enormous restrictions on the diffusion of culture in Spain, some historians, such as Henry Kamen, argue that such strict control was impossible in practice and that there was much more liberty in this respect than is often believed. And Irving Leonard has conclusively demonstrated that, despite repeated royal prohibitions, romances of chivalry, such as Amadis of Gaul, found their way to the New World with the blessing of the Inquisition. Moreover, with the coming of the Age of Enlightenment in the 18th century, increasing numbers of licenses to possess and read prohibited texts were granted.
...
Some scholars state that one of the main effects of the inquisition was to end free thought and scientific thought in Spain. As one contemporary Spaniard in exile put it: "Our country is a land of ... barbarism; down there one cannot produce any culture without being suspected of heresy, error and Judaism. Thus silence was imposed on the learned."[citation needed] For the next few centuries, while the rest of Europe was slowly awakened by the influence of the Enlightenment, Spain stagnated.[58] However, this conclusion is contested.
...



posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 02:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
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.


Allow me to post it...



Pay close attention to her talking points and tell me they don't sound like the same talking points of the anti-Trumpers on here...
edit on 16-2-2017 by LSU0408 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 02:48 PM
link   
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
Censorship from a religious group. Sounds similar to something I witnessed in modern times. Care to guess what side of the political spectrum they were on?

Of course, there is this slick move, like in this thread, to say peoples religion is now this that or the other and point out the similarities to things like the inquisition.

All I can say is that both sides do this as well.



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



posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 02:59 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik

Damnd leftie protestant SJW commies found the right-winger angle on the inquisition. Fcking piece of work...




posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 02:59 PM
link   
a reply to: LSU0408

I saw her in that BAMN thread, but didn't see that interview.

What dripping HYPOCRISY!

Take those pronouns out of her "fascist" description and its precisely what she is. And shes even the one out committing the acts of violence out in the open streets where the peoples shes against have not been not even a 1 on a scale of 1 to her 10.

"A fascist movement takes many forms, and always tries to have one form that's more respectable and a little bit milder".

I'll say.

She's undoubtedly as ultimately deluded and hypocritical as a human being ever could be.

He didn't ask he the difference between her whole deal vs. these "fascists".



posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 03:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: LSU0408

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


Meh, I guess. I was talking about the protesters and rioters being terrorists.



posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 03:03 PM
link   
Interview with Berkeley protest organiser, most rabid and disgusting Ive seen yet


originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
Clear as day: about preventing outsiders from being able to speak. Their SJW Supremacist Movement (SJWFRONT). Race, religion, party etc = ALL tribes (Tribalism). Any and all can become the same kind of evil supremacists.

www.abovetopsecret.com...
edit on 16-2-2017 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 03:05 PM
link   
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

He's real passive aggressive with every guest he has up, he lets them expose themselves. He always has people like her. She's probably the worst I've seen though. Her talking points are exactly what hear from resident lefties here that excuse all these violent protests and blame the actions on someone else.



posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 03:06 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik

IF you can demonstrate a clear history of anybody besides SJW's out on the march against peoples freedom of speech (on the streets, in colleges, in media, in social media, etc, etc, etc) then by all means....



posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 03:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: LSU0408
Meh, I guess. I was talking about the protesters and rioters being terrorists.


Yes, the new buzzword. I guess you can say some are but it doesn't apply to everyone unless you use a big enough brush.

I remember during the Tea Party years that the red flag to look out for was for the "left" admin labeling protesters domestic terrorists. Ironic.
edit on 16-2-2017 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 03:26 PM
link   
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Pretty specific request. Good thing I didn't claim any of that.

I claimed that the religious right did stand behind censorship. Can you prove otherwise?

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



posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 03:34 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik

Ah yes. Religious zealots all about censorship. And today we have SJW's whose daily censorship ambitions extend as far as literally redefining the English language to suit the agenda their dogmatic PC doctrine.

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



posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 03:39 PM
link   
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

So you agree? There are elements on both sides that are guilty of the same thing.

Maybe you're all nazis? Damned nazis really did win WWII.
edit on 16-2-2017 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 03:43 PM
link   
Interesting. I googled sjwfront after seeing this and ...well...this thread was the first result, then a whiny article about gamergate. I thought we were done with those pesky, women hating 13 year olds? LOL

Then a few more relevent articles...then an article comparing Stormfront to SJWs from Reddit and some religions SJW article from 2015.

I just wanted to see if there was an actual group of people or an association or non profit calling themselves "SJWFRONT" but alas, there isn't.

It would appear this thread is mainly about when someone disagrees with you they are an SJW and when a group of people has a shared opinion on a matter they are an SJWFront. Do I have it?



posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 04:01 PM
link   
a reply to: amazing



As far as I knew I coined the phrase (been using it for some months now), but I never actually checked.

Liberals Want You to Die if You Disagree with Them

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: Shamrock6

I thought of it at some point after posting these "SJW or STORMFRONT" videos. They're of this sort of madlib game, reddit users came up with, where they go pull bigot quotes from either kind of site, remove the pronouns, and then the game is you try to guess whether it was Nu-Nazi or a Neo-Nazi that said it.




posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 04:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: amazing



As far as I knew I coined the phrase (been using it for some months now), but I never actually checked.

Liberals Want You to Die if You Disagree with Them

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: Shamrock6

I thought of it at some point after posting these "SJW or STORMFRONT" videos. They're of this sort of madlib game, reddit users came up with, where they go pull bigot quotes from either kind of site, remove the pronouns, and then the game is you try to guess whether it was Nu-Nazi or a Neo-Nazi that said it.




Maybe you did. You are a trailblazer.



posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 05:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
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.


Here. She's crazy.






oops!
edit on 2 16 2017 by burgerbuddy because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 11:14 PM
link   
Shocking video has emerged of a thug pulling an assault rifle on a Trump supporter because he had a “Make America Great Again” flag attached to his truck.




posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 11:35 PM
link   
Video The Guardian Justifies Violence against political opponents

originally posted by: Grambler


In short, this video says that although Michelle Obama said when they go low, we go high, we have to acknowledge that this isn't always effective. The speaker contends that liberals want to engage the right on merits and debate, but the conservatives won't allow it. So in these cases like when Richard Spencer got punched, it feel great to those on the left. And while they don't endorse violence, they won't condone it either. In fact, the left needs get violent against people like Spencer to stop him.

Don't take my word for it though, watch the video.

This is insane. It is getting worse, and I feel bad for reasonable people on the left. I know people will say this happens on both sides, but point to me one main stream new site that has endorsed conservative violence against liberal? (Maybe its out there and I would condemn it too, but I haven't seen it).

Its no longer just the fringe endorsing violence on the left, its seeping into the main stream. Until people on all sides stand up to these insane proponents of violence, I feel the problem is only going to get far worse.



new topics

top topics



 
48
<< 14  15  16    18  19 >>

log in

join