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.

 

You're LOSING !!

page: 7
92
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 30 2017 @ 08:31 AM
link   
a reply to: kaylaluv

Yes, that's what I meant. Confederate statues being taken down and/or destroyed. Exactly that.




posted on Jun, 30 2017 @ 08:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
a reply to: kaylaluv

Yes, that's what I meant. Confederate statues being taken down and/or destroyed. Exactly that.


Oh, now you add in "taken down". That's a bit different than destroyed. You know you are a bit prone to hyperbole, don't you? No confederate statues were destroyed. Just moved off of state property.

edit on 30-6-2017 by kaylaluv because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 30 2017 @ 08:38 AM
link   
a reply to: kaylaluv

Okay, destroyed. Feel better now.

It's irrelevant, the difference. Would it be okay to "take down" the Statue of Liberty? How about the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier? Or the Lincoln Memorial, or the Viet Nam War Memorial???

I don't care if they're 'taken down' or 'destroyed', the point is they've been desecrated from their original placement. The rest is just semantics and a rabbit-hole I'm not going down.

ETA...my historical lineage had my family line on the side of the North, but I don't advocate the 'removal' and/or destruction of monuments to those of the South. Why does anyone else?




edit on 6/30/2017 by Flyingclaydisk because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 30 2017 @ 08:42 AM
link   
a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

No, not semantics. ISIS destroying historical artifacts so that no one can see them has nothing to do with moving statues to private property where anyone can still see them.



posted on Jun, 30 2017 @ 08:42 AM
link   
a reply to: kaylaluv



so of course, all those liberals are crazy, totalling their cars by destroying our heritage...



posted on Jun, 30 2017 @ 08:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
a reply to: redhorse

Well, I suppose we could start with Ferguson, MO for starters.

Need I go on?

Dallas, Baltimore, Berkley, and Atlanta have all experienced paralyzing riots, fires and/or looting.

Okay, so I answered your question, now you answer mine...

Name the last place / time where there was a conservative intiated riot, fire or looting...just one. (?)







Those cities did not burn to the ground. There was rioting and looting but No. City. Burned. To. The. Ground. That is not reality, and since you are (apparently) so well grounded in said reality, I thought it worthwhile to point out an apparent discrepancy. So that, you know, you can be sure that you aren't living in a fantasy land where liberals are burning cities to the ground. I mean reality is reality right? Or, I guess for you, hyperbole is reality and the rest of us play with dolls when we can't handle the truth.

You are correct in that conservatives tend to not engage in rioting and looting, at least not recently. If you go to the far right, particularly those with a racist bent, violence is fairly common, although the flavor is different. They do things like shoot up churches (Charleston church shooting) instead. Although, I think it is fair to say that Dylann Roof no more represents most conservatives than those looters represent most liberals. But then again, Mr. Roof seemed under the impression that black men sexually assault white women in order to attack the white race, and you seem to think that liberals are burning cities to the ground.

So, while violent conservatives respect property more they don't seem to respect life more, which I find far more disturbing. None of this changes the fact that no one, absolutely no one, conservative or liberal, has burned a city to the ground.



posted on Jun, 30 2017 @ 08:51 AM
link   
a reply to: kaylaluv

You're missing the point.

Why do they have to be 'relocated' at all? Why is it such a hardship for these historical items to remain on State property???



posted on Jun, 30 2017 @ 08:53 AM
link   
a reply to: redhorse

Thanks for playing.



posted on Jun, 30 2017 @ 08:54 AM
link   
a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

but, all those cities are still standing, so obviously they weren't burned to the ground were they??
were there even entire city blocks burnt down... nope...
did all the liberals in those cities do the burning.... nope
just a small portion of the entire city affected by a small portion of the nation's population who may or may not have been liberal, and dare I say that in most cases it was more about race relations, cop shootings???
and, you want to use that very, very small percentage of the us population who may or may not be liberal, very well and probably were more of the "I really don't give a dang about the politics" to justify proclaiming around half of the population as being your enemy...
and you see no problem with that????



posted on Jun, 30 2017 @ 08:57 AM
link   
a reply to: dawnstar

Excuses.

This is my surprised face....

edit on 6/30/2017 by Flyingclaydisk because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 30 2017 @ 09:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
a reply to: kaylaluv

You're missing the point.


I know exactly what your point is. You are trying to equate liberals with ISIS.


Why do they have to be 'relocated' at all? Why is it such a hardship for these historical items to remain on State property???



Because it gives the appearance that the state approves of slavery and oppression. They actually did at the time the statues were first erected, but that has changed now, has it not?



posted on Jun, 30 2017 @ 09:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
a reply to: redhorse

Thanks for playing.





What a lame response. Couldn't you come up with anything better than that?



posted on Jun, 30 2017 @ 09:03 AM
link   
a reply to: Flyingclaydisk




Excuses.



you must be talking about the excuses you use to caste half the population as enemies...
I don't need any excuses...



posted on Jun, 30 2017 @ 09:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
a reply to: redhorse

Thanks for playing.





You're welcome.

Also...

No one has burned a city to the ground.



posted on Jun, 30 2017 @ 09:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: kaylaluv

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
a reply to: kaylaluv

You're missing the point.


I know exactly what your point is. You are trying to equate liberals with ISIS.


Actually that wasn't my point, but now that you mention it... My point, which you apparently missed, was about liberals being hypocrites when it comes to history. Constantly trying to re-write it. So yeah, I guess there are some similarities now that you mention it!



Because it gives the appearance that the state approves of slavery and oppression. They actually did at the time the statues were first erected, but that has changed now, has it not?


History is just that, history. Political climates will always change. Why do people now find it necessary to 're-write' history in the present. THAT, is the point!

I don't care what people thought when a statue was erected, and I don't care what they think now. There's simply no excuse for revisionist history like this. They should be left in place, if for no other reason than to serve as an icon of a misguided idea (if this is indeed what people believe). So, once again we have...excuses.

It just never ends, hence this thread.


edit on 6/30/2017 by Flyingclaydisk because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 30 2017 @ 09:16 AM
link   
a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Then Germany should have left up memorials to Hitler on state property and Russia should have left up memorials to Stalin on state property and if North Korea ever gets free, they should leave up memorials to Kim Jong Un...



posted on Jun, 30 2017 @ 09:16 AM
link   
a reply to: dawnstar

You continue to try to bait me with this "half the population" allegation.

Believe me, I saw it the first time you posted it...and the 2nd, and the 3rd.

Just in case it wasn't already readily apparent, I'm not going to engage your bait.

I'm not going down a road where we start debating exactly how many people fall into certain demographic groups. The left knows who the left is, and the right knows who the right is. To get drawn into a debate about how many people fall into each category and what percentages this represents of the overall population is just a method to obfuscate the overall discussion, hence not going there.



posted on Jun, 30 2017 @ 09:20 AM
link   
a reply to: kaylaluv

holy crap wow

so the south is the germans,the russians, or the nokoreans?

or you advocate the behavior of these disgusting dictators?



posted on Jun, 30 2017 @ 09:20 AM
link   
a reply to: kaylaluv

Well, with the possible exception of maybe Hitler (only because he was a special kind of evil), I would say yes.

In the case of Stalin, there are many memorials to Stalin still standing in Russia, for exactly the reasons I stated above. People may not like him, but this doesn't change the fact he existed.



posted on Jun, 30 2017 @ 09:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk



History is just that, history. Political climates will always change. Why do people now find it necessary to 're-write' history in the present. THAT, is the point!


It just never ends, hence this thread.



That is exactly what you are doing though. That's the thing.

People try to rewrite history to suit their own agendas or perspective, which is true and wrong, I agree. We can't learn from mistakes if we deny them, or understand why situations spiraled out of control if we don't understand how ordinary people justify their actions; such as, by saying, for example, that people burned a city to the ground when they did no such thing. You're bitching about it and doing it at the same time. Your complaining about delusional people who can't cope with reality and spouting blatant lies like they are reality. It is high hypocrisy.


edit on 30-6-2017 by redhorse because: (no reason given)

edit on 30-6-2017 by redhorse because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
92
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join