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.

 

Boston let's have a conversation or mb not Foul Language Alert

page: 18
19
<< 15  16  17    19  20 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 12:34 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik




I'm talking about members of ATS not "calling out" those members who make statements like that, but then virtue signaling, I think that is the term in vogue, when someone from the PC crowd makes similar statements.


I cannot say I've been hurt by a statement in my life. Having a tough skin helps. But not criticizing violence and the suppression of human rights has a demonstrable effect in society.




posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 12:35 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik




And sometimes two groups just fight. There is no aggressor or victim, just two willing parties to violence.


None of which would have happened had agitators not shown up with weapons to disrupt and impede someone else's freedom of speech.



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 12:36 PM
link   
a reply to: Kali74

Bostonian here as well.
Agree with everything you've said.



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 12:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: introvert



Violence done in reaction to the violence of others, or assault, or promised violence (like marching down an American street carrying Nazi flags, White Supremacist flags and torches, shouting Nazi slogans) is self-defense. The right of self-defense is primal ... whether you call it natural rights, common law, etc.

You're spot on, and you're not letting apologists squirm away.

Well done.


First you are applauding people making excuses foe the calling of the elimination of all Trump supporters. Disgusting.

Second, what you just typed here is not self defense; you can't hit someone for marching down the street with a flag you don't like or saying things you don't like.



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 12:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Skorpiogurl




Bostonian here as well.
Agree with everything you've said.


I'm curious but do you agree with the protesters and your city officials suppressing the rights and to slander those wanting to have a free speech rally in your city?



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 12:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Gryphon66




or promised violence (like marching down an American street carrying Nazi flags, White Supremacist flags and torches, shouting Nazi slogans) is self-defense

quoted for the 3rd time
still the same quote

you still advocate meeting speech with violence
that is not self defense
you guys are still looneys


Invading a town, marching down a street illegally, with torches, Nazi flags, and chanting Nazi slogans is INDEED a threat to do violence. Which they did.

Anyone who was defending against that violence was in the right. Clear?

You keep trying to say that I don't want people to carry flags or chant slogans or speak freely ... and that, sir or madam, is a BALD FACED LIE.

And every time you say it, you are a BALD FACED LIAR.



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 12:43 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

No, I am not applauding people making excuses ... that's what you're doing. Over and over in every thread you post this repugnant feculence in.

What I typed here is quite directly self-defense. The act of a midnight invasion of an American town with Nazi flags, torches, chanting Nazi slogans is clear evidence that those who are doing those act mean to do violence.

That violence is historical and very clear. You are defending terrorists and murderers.



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 12:44 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

nice that you choose to omit your quote
you cant defend it so may as well ignore it
"promised" violence is not violence
meeting speech with violence is bad



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 12:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Gryphon66

nice that you choose to omit your quote
you cant defend it so may as well ignore it
"promised" violence is not violence
meeting speech with violence is bad


You are a bald faced liar. My full quote is quoted in full by me above.

You are the one that can only cut and paste a sentence fragment and make stupid claims.

Yes, legally a direct threat of violence is the same as violence ... it's called assault.

Ask the Secret Service.
edit on 23-8-2017 by Gryphon66 because: Noted



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 12:47 PM
link   
a reply to: TheTory

I agree that people have the right to protest anything their little hearts desire, so long as it's done the right way. My city officials... don't even get me started.



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 12:50 PM
link   
a reply to: Skorpiogurl




I agree that people have the right to protest anything their little hearts desire, so long as it's done the right way. My city officials... don't even get me started.


What a breath of fresh air. Thank you.



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 12:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Grambler

No, I am not applauding people making excuses ... that's what you're doing. Over and over in every thread you post this repugnant feculence in.

What I typed here is quite directly self-defense. The act of a midnight invasion of an American town with Nazi flags, torches, chanting Nazi slogans is clear evidence that those who are doing those act mean to do violence.

That violence is historical and very clear. You are defending terrorists and murderers.


You have applauded a poster that called for the elimination of all trump supporters, you have no right to make moral judgements about anyone.

The Nazis with the torches were disgusting, but that does not give anyone the reason to use physical violence against them.

People find groups yelling to kill all cops to be offensive, and they too do not have the right to use violence agasint them.

Defending free speech is not defending Nazis.

However, your calls for attacks on free speech is defending the behavior we see in the op and many other places where people are being beaten for merely showing support for a political candidate.



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 12:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheTory
I cannot say I've been hurt by a statement in my life. Having a tough skin helps.

Has nothing to do with what I posted.


But not criticizing violence and the suppression of human rights has a demonstrable effect in society.

And the inconsistency with which some people do this, usually based on partisanship, is hypocritical.
edit on 23-8-2017 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 12:58 PM
link   
a reply to: TheTory

Not true. There were people on both sides that were there to fight. Among those there were no victims.
edit on 23-8-2017 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 01:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler
The Nazis with the torches were disgusting, but that does not give anyone the reason to use physical violence against them.

It gives them the reason even if it doesn't give them the right.



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 01:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

One more comment before I return to intentionally skipping over your posts.

I really enjoyed reading your posts once. Even when I disagreed with you. You were reasonable, honest, and gave good arguments.

Yes, I applauded what TrueBrit said and would do so again. You, however, are lying about what he said.

Being willing to "punch a Nazi" is not the same as "punch a Trump supporter" except when the Trump supporter is a Nazi.

You're defending Nazis. That doesn't make you one, it makes you an snivelling apologist.

In my book, that's even worse.



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 01:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: TheTory
I cannot say I've been hurt by a statement in my life. Having a tough skin helps.

Has nothing to do with what I posted.


But not criticizing violence and the suppression of human rights has a demonstrable effect in society.

And the inconsistency with which some people do this, usually based on partisanship, is hypocritical.


Hypocrisy is when someone claims moral standards to which one's own behaviour doesn't conform. There is nothing hypocritical about the inconsistently of calling out some groups and not others, and I'm not sure where you're getting that idea.

Are we talking about someone in particular? Maybe you should call him/her out as a hypocrite.



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 01:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler



You have applauded a poster that called for the elimination of all trump supporters, you have no right to make moral judgements about anyone.


After what you did yesterday, I don't think you are in any position whatsoever to make any moral judgments yourself, or lecture anyone else for that matter.



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 01:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

Well the words are there for everyone to see. He called all trump supporters defenders of nazis, and said all of these people should be eliminated.

My entire premise is how labeling people nazi defenders who clearly aren't leads to all sort of violence and disgusting suggestions.

You have been gracious enough to prove my point.



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 01:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66



You're defending Nazis. That doesn't make you one, it makes you an snivelling apologist.


It is only acceptable to confront extreme fascists, in his eyes, if they are to the point of killing millions.

By that time in my opinion, it's too late.




top topics



 
19
<< 15  16  17    19  20 >>

log in

join