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.

 

Lefty Fascists Shut Down Yet Another College Speech

page: 4
32
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 3 2017 @ 04:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: reldra

They silenced opposing views.

Fascism.


Modern day equivalent to book burning.

Since books are nothing more than IDEAS written down.




posted on Mar, 3 2017 @ 04:35 PM
link   
a reply to: reldra

I'm curious? If the exact same thing happened to Hillary Clinton while she was trying to make a speech at a University and no doubt she will make a few if they can afford her, what would you say about those from the Right who silenced her, if they succeeded in preventing her from making a speech?

Would you defend the protestors from the Right in the same way you are here? Or would you consider it an attempt to silence speech?

Do those who want to hear a speech have any Rights, or just those who want to silence speech?

You appear to think it's OK to silence speech you don't agree with? Why exactly?



posted on Mar, 3 2017 @ 04:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: reldra

They silenced opposing views.

Fascism.


LOL. No. A protest that causes the other side to give up I guess makes the other side snowflakes.



posted on Mar, 3 2017 @ 04:36 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Only the government is restricted from doing so. People did protest MLK, it was their right to do so even if I don't like it.



posted on Mar, 3 2017 @ 04:36 PM
link   
a reply to: reldra

So because they didn't respond to violence with violence, they deserved to be silenced.


Sick.



posted on Mar, 3 2017 @ 04:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: Shamrock6

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: MysticPearl

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: MysticPearl




her neck was injured when someone pulled her hair


If she has a real injury, she should press charges.



That wasn't your original point. Your original point was essentially, that because I disagree with you, I can come to your place of work, jump on your car, throw cement at it, when you try to leave, grab and pull your hair, then simply brush it off as my right to protest while labelling you the whiner.

That is the exact picture you painted.

Now you're trying to backtrack off your suggestion that beating up women is simply protesting.


Nope. The protesting was fine. Any serious crimes committed should be handled by law enforcement.

The pulling of her hair is an assault in and of itself. She should press charges.

Throwing a sign attached to cement at a vehicle, is a crime. Someone should press charges.

I am not fond of the fact they may have been blocked from leaving.

It is your description of the entire protest as a whole with derogative terms to be concerning. Very concerning.


So....all the other stuff is casually dismissed with "meh, press charges" but it's the use of the terms like "terrorism" that's concerning to you?

Oh my.


Oh my what? I never said 'meh'. If her hair was pulled, she should press charges. If they were blocked from leaving, they should press charges. I assume one person pulled her hair. I assume one or 2 people threw a sign.

I have never put words in your mouth.


Never said you did put words in my mouth. No need to start going all over the map to try and score a point already.

Though I can't say I'm surprised since you can't be bothered to discuss the point I made (hint: it's where you don't seem terribly "concerned" with physical assault but you're "concerned" with words used to describe it) and would rather attempt to pivot into something else entirely that I didn't even say.



posted on Mar, 3 2017 @ 04:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: Blaine91555
a reply to: reldra

I'm curious? If the exact same thing happened to Hillary Clinton while she was trying to make a speech at a University and no doubt she will make a few if they can afford her, what would you say about those from the Right who silenced her, if they succeeded in preventing her from making a speech?

Would you defend the protestors from the Right in the same way you are here? Or would you consider it an attempt to silence speech?

Do those who want to hear a speech have any Rights, or just those who want to silence speech?

You appear to think it's OK to silence speech you don't agree with? Why exactly?



This was not silencing of speech.

If Hillary Clinton went to a university to speak and students protested to the point she felt she had to leave, I would DEFINITELY support the students.

You think I am that shallow to even ask that???
edit on 3-3-2017 by reldra because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 3 2017 @ 04:38 PM
link   
a reply to: reldra

Kids that behave like that need pepper spray to the face then chains on their wrists and ankles. Act like an animal, get put in a cage. Fine the parents as well, to the tune of 20 grand per incident and see the parents get a handle on their rotten sick kids very quickly. Rubber bullets work well on rotten kids too



posted on Mar, 3 2017 @ 04:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: reldra

They silenced opposing views.

Fascism.


LOL. No. A protest that causes the other side to give up I guess makes the other side snowflakes.


Give up? It's called "acting like the only adult in the room".

You'd prefer 20-30 conservatives fighting back? That's you solution?



posted on Mar, 3 2017 @ 04:39 PM
link   
a reply to: reldra


This was not silencing of speech.

If Hillary Clinton went to a university to speak and students protested to the point she felt she had to leave, I would DEFINITELY support the students.


I'm sorry but one person's fundamental human rights do not Trump another's. Wrong society.



posted on Mar, 3 2017 @ 04:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: Blaine91555
a reply to: reldra

I'm curious? If the exact same thing happened to Hillary Clinton while she was trying to make a speech at a University and no doubt she will make a few if they can afford her, what would you say about those from the Right who silenced her, if they succeeded in preventing her from making a speech?

Would you defend the protestors from the Right in the same way you are here? Or would you consider it an attempt to silence speech?

Do those who want to hear a speech have any Rights, or just those who want to silence speech?

You appear to think it's OK to silence speech you don't agree with? Why exactly?



This was not silencing of speech.

If Hillary Clinton went to a university to speak and students protested to the point she felt she had to leave, I would DEFINITELY support the students.


You're right. It wasn't a silencing of speech. It was VIOLENCE, INTIMIDATION, BODILY INJURY, RESTRICTION OF FREE MOVEMENT.

The injured lady is in a neck brace. You supporting the behavior of these criminals is disgusting.



posted on Mar, 3 2017 @ 04:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: reldra

They silenced opposing views.

Fascism.


LOL. No. A protest that causes the other side to give up I guess makes the other side snowflakes.


That's it. You've finally outed yourself as having utterly lost the plot in your shrill terror over Trump.

To advance the notion that because one group didn't respond violently to violence visited upon them makes them the losers and "snowflakes" is just....mind boggling. Utterly mind boggling.

I cannot for one second ever, ever see you referring to anybody on the left as a "snowflake" if they were silenced and attacked by right-wingers yet refused to respond in kind to the attacks. Not in a million years would you ever call them snowflakes. Victims? Heroes? Sure, you'd call them that.

Disgusting.
edit on 3-3-2017 by Shamrock6 because: less name call-ey



posted on Mar, 3 2017 @ 04:40 PM
link   
a reply to: Kali74

Shutting down an event that you dislike is not critique, critique is debate, critique must first allow the thing to occur otherwise its not critique, its literally a shutdown.

You also have the right to travel freely unmolested (by both governmental bodies and the citizenry) which I note you have not commented upon, possibly because it shows the true colours of these people.



posted on Mar, 3 2017 @ 04:40 PM
link   
a reply to: reldra

Sure and if they grabbed her by the hair, hurt her neck, surrounded her car violently, I would support deadly force.



posted on Mar, 3 2017 @ 04:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: Shamrock6

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: Shamrock6

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: MysticPearl

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: MysticPearl




her neck was injured when someone pulled her hair


If she has a real injury, she should press charges.



That wasn't your original point. Your original point was essentially, that because I disagree with you, I can come to your place of work, jump on your car, throw cement at it, when you try to leave, grab and pull your hair, then simply brush it off as my right to protest while labelling you the whiner.

That is the exact picture you painted.

Now you're trying to backtrack off your suggestion that beating up women is simply protesting.


Nope. The protesting was fine. Any serious crimes committed should be handled by law enforcement.

The pulling of her hair is an assault in and of itself. She should press charges.

Throwing a sign attached to cement at a vehicle, is a crime. Someone should press charges.

I am not fond of the fact they may have been blocked from leaving.

It is your description of the entire protest as a whole with derogative terms to be concerning. Very concerning.


So....all the other stuff is casually dismissed with "meh, press charges" but it's the use of the terms like "terrorism" that's concerning to you?

Oh my.


Oh my what? I never said 'meh'. If her hair was pulled, she should press charges. If they were blocked from leaving, they should press charges. I assume one person pulled her hair. I assume one or 2 people threw a sign.

I have never put words in your mouth.


Never said you did put words in my mouth. No need to start going all over the map to try and score a point already.

Though I can't say I'm surprised since you can't be bothered to discuss the point I made (hint: it's where you don't seem terribly "concerned" with physical assault but you're "concerned" with words used to describe it) and would rather attempt to pivot into something else entirely that I didn't even say.


I already said I was concerned with it. Do you want me to cry? Saying I was concerned is enough. You took that as 'Meh'. I am not trying to score a point.



posted on Mar, 3 2017 @ 04:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: reldra


This was not silencing of speech.

If Hillary Clinton went to a university to speak and students protested to the point she felt she had to leave, I would DEFINITELY support the students.


I'm sorry but one person's fundamental human rights do not Trump another's. Wrong society.


Goes with that word EQUALITY.

Trump critics seem to think they have more RIGHTS than others.



posted on Mar, 3 2017 @ 04:41 PM
link   
Die Sturmabteilung (aka The Sturmabteilung S.A.)

aka Brownshirts

aka -- S.A.

aka -- Schutzstaffel (SS)




posted on Mar, 3 2017 @ 04:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: Shamrock6

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: reldra

They silenced opposing views.

Fascism.


LOL. No. A protest that causes the other side to give up I guess makes the other side snowflakes.


That's it. You've finally outed yourself as having utterly lost the plot in your shrill terror over Trump.

To advance the notion that because one group didn't respond violently to violence visited upon them makes them the losers and "snowflakes" is just....mind boggling. Utterly mind boggling.

I cannot for one second ever, ever see you referring to anybody on the left as a "snowflake" if they were silenced and attacked by right-wingers yet refused to respond in kind to the attacks. Not in a million years would you ever call them snowflakes. Victims? Heroes? Sure, you'd call them that.

Disgusting.


You first called me a disgusting creature. I think you edited.

I have not lost any plot. This thread had nothing to do with Trump. I can see where your focus is, though.

I never said 'because one group didn't respond violently'

You seem to have a rich fantasy life and are making ridiculous assumptions.



posted on Mar, 3 2017 @ 04:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: reldra


This was not silencing of speech.

If Hillary Clinton went to a university to speak and students protested to the point she felt she had to leave, I would DEFINITELY support the students.


I'm sorry but one person's fundamental human rights do not Trump another's. Wrong society.


Goes with that word EQUALITY.

Trump critics seem to think they have more RIGHTS than others.


EDIT. I totally misread. I withdraw my comment and apologize.
edit on 3/3/17 by Ameilia because: Removed



posted on Mar, 3 2017 @ 04:45 PM
link   
a reply to: reldra

I hope you just woke up on the wrong side of the bed today, and you don't truly believe the things you are saying.




top topics



 
32
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join