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.

 

Fox News retracts unfounded story about DNC staffer's death

page: 3
10
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 23 2017 @ 10:53 PM
link   
a reply to: BlueAjah


There seems to be a big problem with liberals in this country not understanding that.

I am not what you would call a liberal, I am not in your country (thank God!) and I was responding to a specific question.

I don’t mind reading what people have to say. It’s you and Mr Mulder who seem to be appalled by what I have to say.




posted on May, 23 2017 @ 10:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
Controlled Opposition + Controlled Confirmation all at the same time !!



ATS used used to have a lot of unique individual well thought out posts, now - it still does don't get me wrong but these partisan bandwagons are a real hoot to ride on. I agree with controlled opposition + controlled confirmation = funny jelly bean guy riding with us.

In keeping with the OP, I'm curious how many of these "retractions" have we had regarding stories like Seth's? And where might we find a list from the past two years of "dead guys and gals" from the left and the right? You know, people like Seth, Shawn and Gavin... Is there a litany of suspected conservative hay riders that blame their own party for killing them? Any liberal media outlets like CNN claiming conservatives are killling each other??



posted on May, 23 2017 @ 10:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: Astyanax
a reply to: BlueAjah


There seems to be a big problem with liberals in this country not understanding that.

I am not what you would call a liberal, I am not in your country (thank God!) and I was responding to a specific question.

I don’t mind reading what people have to say. It’s you and Mr Mulder who seem to be appalled by what I have to say.


I'm not appalled at all by what you say.

You contradictions, callousness to the families of the dead who you think should keep their mouths just and not let terrorism affect them from this "minor" incident, and over simplified solutions (if we don't fear terrorism, it can't hurt us), as amusing to point out.

I think you are funny.

Got any other great nuggets of wisdom for us?

The only thing to fear is fear itself?

How about love conquers all?

Can someone please get you to the UK anti terrorism task force and so you can let them know that all we need to do to defeat terrorism is ignore it?



posted on May, 23 2017 @ 11:27 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

No contradictions, except in the mind of someone lacking the wisdom to understand.

The families of the dead would be helped, not hurt, by my prescription. Leaving them to mourn in peace is the best thing the media and the general public can do for them.

Unfortunately, there are many who cannot rise above your level of understanding.

And that is why we still have terrorists, and terrorism.



posted on May, 23 2017 @ 11:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: Astyanax
a reply to: Grambler

No contradictions, except in the mind of someone lacking the wisdom to understand.

The families of the dead would be helped, not hurt, by my prescription. Leaving them to mourn in peace is the best thing the media and the general public can do for them.

Unfortunately, there are many who cannot rise above your level of understanding.

And that is why we still have terrorists, and terrorism.


But you are not suggesting just allowing them to mourn in peace. You are saying they shouldn't speak in public about it, that they can't be hurt by terrorism if they don't let it, and that this was a minor incident.

Lets keep in mind that you initial post on this wasn't that the media should stop sensationalizing terrorism.

It was that people on an internet chat board shouldn't discuss terrorism or ways to combat it. That by criticizing politicians that tell us to just get use to terrorism because its a way of life we are causing terrorism.

You are so arrogant and think so much of your intelligence, and you solution is literally if you don't believe in terrorism it can't hurt you. Its absolutely hilarious!



posted on May, 23 2017 @ 11:55 PM
link   
Indeed. I believe the family has a claim against Fox News and Wheeler. Libel and emotional distress should be their causes of action against a repugnant company and an idiot "contributor."



originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: Grambler

Because these Fox reporters didn't vet their source, every story critical of Trump citing an anonymous source is also unvetted? That doesn't sound very reasonable to me.

And what about the Rod Wheeler shenanigans? Rod Wheeler is claiming that the same reporters also are the source of the false claims that he made to a Fox affiliate and later to Sean Hannity. I smell a conspiracy at Fox to fabricate a story.

People should be fired.




posted on May, 24 2017 @ 12:07 AM
link   
a reply to: Grambler


You are saying they shouldn't speak in public about it

I did not.


that they can't be hurt by terrorism

You’re getting your threads mixed up, but I didn’t say that either.


It was that people on an internet chat board shouldn't discuss terrorism or ways to combat it.

I did not. In fact, I was proposing (in that other thread) a way to combat it. Namely, ignore it. Unless it affects you directly, or you happen to work for a counter-terrorism department of some kind.


That by criticizing politicians that tell us to just get use to terrorism because its a way of life we are causing terrorism.

I didn’t say that, either. Your post is riddled with falsehoods.


You are so arrogant and think so much of your intelligence, and you solution is literally if you don't believe in terrorism it can't hurt you. Its absolutely hilarious!

To a stupid person, perhaps.



posted on May, 24 2017 @ 12:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: Astyanax


Your original post on that thread in its entirety.



Oh, for God’s sake. There was a bomb. Twenty people died and some were injured. A minor incident in the life of a big city.

The way to deal with terrorism is to ignore it.

Treat the wounded. Bury the dead. Go after the attackers and bring them to justice.

And SHUT UP ABOUT IT.



So when you say you didn't tell people not to speak in public about it, your are lying. You told people to shut up about it.


You also said the way to solve terrorism is to not talk about it.

Your quote was directed at an OP that was specifically saying we shouldn't just let politicians tell us we need to just accept terrorism, so yes, you were telling people on a chatroom to shut up about it.

You think this is a minor incident. You think that by ignoring terrorism it will go away.

And you think you are very intelligent! These things combined are very amusing.



posted on May, 24 2017 @ 12:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: BlueAjah
Think about this...
If they are really trying THIS hard to shut up Hannity, then....
he is on the right track, and "they" are scared to death.


Sean Hannity‏Verified account @seanhannity

IMPORTANT! Mediamatters is trying to silence me, get me fired, pressure my advertising on radio & TV. Liberal Fascism. I need your help!!


twitter.com...


SEAN HANNITY is not retracting what he has said. But he said tonight that he's not going to talk about the Seth Rich "incident". Maybe the pressure has forced him to clam up.

Source: www.thedailybeast.com...



posted on May, 24 2017 @ 12:34 AM
link   
a reply to: Grambler


Your original post on that thread in its entirety.

Thanks for saving me the trouble. Where does it contain all the things you say I’ve said?



posted on May, 24 2017 @ 12:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: Astyanax
a reply to: Grambler


Your original post on that thread in its entirety.

Thanks for saving me the trouble. Where does it contain all the things you say I’ve said?


"You are saying they shouldn't speak in public about it"

You said bury the dead, go after the terrorists, and shut up about it. You left no caveat for mourners speaking in public.

" that they can't be hurt by terrorism"

You said the only thing needed to stop terrorism is to ignore. Hence your story about your relative watching some guy getting his head get blown off, and they ignored it and poof, terrorism ended.

"It was that people on an internet chat board shouldn't discuss terrorism or ways to combat it"

You told the OP and us on that thread to "SHUT UP ABOUT IT"

"That by criticizing politicians that tell us to just get use to terrorism because its a way of life we are causing terrorism."

That was directly what the OP was discussing, and you told him to SHUT UP ABOUT IT.

There, does that clear it up for you?


edit on 24-5-2017 by Grambler because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 24 2017 @ 12:51 AM
link   
a reply to: Grambler


You left no caveat for mourners speaking in public.

I was, perhaps foolishly, not taking literal-minded idiots into account when writing my post.


You said the only thing needed to stop terrorism is to ignore.

I did not say that.


There, does that clear it up for you?

Indeed it does. You have clarified very well how you failed to understand my post, reacted to it in typical knee-jerk fashion, missed the whole point and are now falsely accusing me of saying things I didn’t say. Many thanks.


edit on 24/5/17 by Astyanax because: of bad formatting.



posted on May, 24 2017 @ 12:58 AM
link   
a reply to: Astyanax

I will admit you did not say the only thing needed was to ignore it. You said that was the best way to deal with it. You did say the other things which you claimed in a post above that you didn't.

Part of the OP which you were posting to was a person in the Islamic community wanting to weed out radicals.

Your post was directed to the OP said to shut up. How does that not mean that all of the ideas being discussed in the OP should not be talked about?

My point in bringing it up on this thread was in response to your posts about how discussing conspiracies wasn't fruitfal or could hurt victims families, and I am not trying to derail, so we can leave this discussion to the other thread I guess.







 
10
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join