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.

 

Congratulations! Ann Coulter finally silenced on Berkeley Campus

page: 12
86
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 26 2017 @ 08:27 PM
link   
a reply to: ColdWisdom

As he was at risk for all along and he knew it. Didn't stop him.




posted on Apr, 26 2017 @ 08:27 PM
link   
a reply to: Kali74

Count them yourself.



posted on Apr, 26 2017 @ 08:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: Annee

Instigate what though?


I was a fan of Coulter when she first came on the scene. I thought she was witty.

But, after the success of her first book - - it was more like she was "throwing darts".



posted on Apr, 26 2017 @ 08:29 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

I can't, your definition is wonky.



posted on Apr, 26 2017 @ 08:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

I see violence from the right as well. Robert Dear, Timothy McVeigh, KKK, anti-gay agenda, etc. etc.


A man deemed mentally incompetent, an attack from over 20 years ago, a militant arm of the Democratic party, and a traditional perspective that has not gotten violent.

Yeah, that's apples to apples.



At least people on the left don't kill with guns and bombs.


Because them there Tea Partiers have been like the wild wild west, eh?

Meanwhile, who's been shooting the cops? Who's been throwing the molotov cocktails?



posted on Apr, 26 2017 @ 08:31 PM
link   
Free speech is and must be absolute! Then you get someone like Annee who wishes to evaluate the quality of the speech, the stature of the speaker, the value of the content. And what you get is the elimination of free speech.
edit on 4/26/2017 by WeAreAWAKE because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 26 2017 @ 08:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE

Free speech is and must be absolute! Then you get someone like Annee who wishes to evaluate the quality of the speech, the stature of the speaker, the value of the content. And what you get is the elimination of free speech.


Free speech is not and has never been absolute!


edit on 26-4-2017 by Annee because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 26 2017 @ 08:33 PM
link   
a reply to: Kali74

Here's a better question, how many on the left have denounced this?



posted on Apr, 26 2017 @ 08:33 PM
link   
a reply to: Annee

I don't mean to defend anything she says ideologically. But, legally? What is she saying that instigates violence and might, therefore, be unlawful?



posted on Apr, 26 2017 @ 08:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE
Free speech is and must be absolute! Then you get someone like Annee who wishes to evaluate the quality of the speech, the stature of the speaker, the value of the content. And what you get is the elimination of free speech.


Point of order: yelling Fire in a crowded theatre and directly threatening permanent physical harm or death are things people can say, but there should be consequences.



posted on Apr, 26 2017 @ 08:36 PM
link   
a reply to: Teikiatsu

We are talking about extremists on both sides. The left is not the only one guilty.
And the BLM thing has already been covered. I don't consider them to be a political entity.



posted on Apr, 26 2017 @ 08:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE
Free speech is and must be absolute! Then you get someone like Annee who wishes to evaluate the quality of the speech, the stature of the speaker, the value of the content. And what you get is the elimination of free speech.


I think the freedom to express yourself is an absolute freedom.

Once you put conditions on it, it is no longer free speech.



posted on Apr, 26 2017 @ 08:36 PM
link   
a reply to: knowledgehunter0986

Besides myself, I don't know... there's like 5 of us on ATS.



posted on Apr, 26 2017 @ 08:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: Annee

I don't mean to defend anything she says ideologically. But, legally? What is she saying that instigates violence and might, therefore, be unlawful?


It is her intention to push buttons. Same as Milo.

I've followed her for years.

Tricky question you're asking: "What is she saying that instigates violence".

I never used the word Violence in anything I said.



posted on Apr, 26 2017 @ 08:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Kali74

It's interesting how they think all of us liberals support this.



posted on Apr, 26 2017 @ 08:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Teikiatsu




A man deemed mentally incompetent, an attack from over 20 years ago, a militant arm of the Democratic party, and a traditional perspective that has not gotten violent.


Conservative's don't have manifestos.

Wrong political ideology. Marxists/Communists have manifestos.

McVeigh was a manufacture villain.



posted on Apr, 26 2017 @ 08:38 PM
link   
a reply to: knowledgehunter0986

Im not looking to any "left" for an answer, but its the gist of my quetion here, too.

Is there anyone here that would defend the people who made the threats that led to the cancellation of this event? Is it rational behavior that led to this? Does Ann Coulter share the blame here for daring to speak (or put on a show, depending on your viewpoint)?

I suspect not. I could be wrong, but i don't think many on ATS would defend that. But who knows. It is a fair point tat Ann coulter works pretty hard to be incendiary and provocative. SO there is that.



posted on Apr, 26 2017 @ 08:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Annee

You said it was not free speech,

legally speaking it would have to be a threat of violence to fall outside the realm of 'free speech'.



posted on Apr, 26 2017 @ 08:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE

Free speech is and must be absolute! Then you get someone like Annee who wishes to evaluate the quality of the speech, the stature of the speaker, the value of the content. And what you get is the elimination of free speech.


Free speech is not and has never been absolute!


Maybe you are confused. "Free Speech" is a term...it means that you have the right to an opinion, a view and a belief. You are allowed, uninhibited by law to say what you believe. "Free Speech" is NOT the freedom to say anything...like yelling "fire" in a crowded room and regardless, your freedom to speech does NOT protect you from retribution by others. But your right to the term "Free Speech" is absolute.
edit on 4/26/2017 by WeAreAWAKE because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 26 2017 @ 08:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: Teikiatsu

originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE
Free speech is and must be absolute! Then you get someone like Annee who wishes to evaluate the quality of the speech, the stature of the speaker, the value of the content. And what you get is the elimination of free speech.


Point of order: yelling Fire in a crowded theatre and directly threatening permanent physical harm or death are things people can say, but there should be consequences.


And, yet, the SCOTUS has gone from that litmus test to the test that the SPEAKER must actually INTEND for violence or injury/death to result from such speech.

So, I suppose someone should demonstrate how Ann Coulter has spoken with the intent for violence and people to be hurt/killed.

Otherwise, she is just stating her distasteful opinion. And I am cool with that...so is the U.S.Constitution.
edit on 26-4-2017 by MotherMayEye because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
86
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join