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.

 

Liberal Media - Stop Embarrassing Yourselves

page: 5
39
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 10:05 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert



But you knew about truck nuts for firearms...


OMG do they really look like those stupid things I see hanging off of 4x's, how bloody ridiculous.

Responsible gun owners, pfft.

K~




posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 10:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: projectvxn
When did I make the assertion that the accessory didn't exist?

That is how it looked.

Again, they just showed some accessories available for AR-15s. That is one of them. They didn't say the guy had one, they just said it was available, which it is.

What were you going on about?



posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 10:20 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik




That is how it looked.


But not what was written right?

Idiot said it was in black and white.

Where the # is it?

What are YOU going on about?



posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 10:20 PM
link   
a reply to: projectvxn



When did I make the assertion that the accessory didn't exist?


You made the assertion that USA Today used an image of a chainsaw bayonet to "depict the rifle used by the gunman in Sunderland, Texas".

They did not. That is a lie.

You also left out the context in which they did discuss such accessories.

You also use the ATF website as a reference and pontificate about educating one's self about such things, yet the ATF website does not appear to discuss any such attachment.

You didn't know about the attachment. Don't be dishonest.



It is factually correct that most liberals don't know a damned thing about guns. If you had read the OP, I made exceptions for folks I know are liberals and know quite a bit about guns, they are the exception not the rule.


Factually correct?

Really?

Please provide that verifiable data. I'd love to see that information.



Please feel free to peruse my OP again for those claims you said I made.

Everything else is just you making accusations.


I did.

Problem is, you are talking out of your ass, with political partisanship and a whole heap of arrogance to boot.



My entire assertion is that their propaganda against gun ownership is embarrassing and cartoonish. That's exactly what is in my op.


I agree. They suck.

Much like your defense of gun ownership.

I can do it better on my own. Stop embarrassing those of us that can do a much better job using the constitution.
edit on 8-11-2017 by introvert because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 10:22 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

No you didn't.

You are insinuating terms that aren't there.

You said it was in black and white.

#ing find it or go away.



posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 10:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: introvert

No you didn't.

You are insinuating terms that aren't there.

You said it was in black and white.

#ing find it or go away.


I said your OP is there in black and white.

It is, is it not?

You didn't know the attachment existed and now you are trying to backtrack, and have not even tried to refute the notion you took the media presentation out-of-context.

Stop being dishonest and stop wasting my time.



posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 10:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: projectvxn
But not what was written right?

Yes, it was.


This story shows an image that USA Today used to depict the rifle used by the gunman in Sunderland, Texas.


The article never said that it was a depiction of "the rifle used by the gunman in Sunderland, Texas" they said the rifle used by the guy had aftermarket accessories available and they proceeded to show some.


edit on 8-11-2017 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 10:34 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert




You didn't know the attachment existed and now you are trying to backtrack,


You're accusing me of lying about something YOU made up. I'm not playing this stupid game with you.




and have not even tried to refute the notion you took the media presentation out-of-context.


Only the embarrassing bull# that it is.

Also:
"A look at the gun used in the Texas church shooting."




Stop being dishonest and stop wasting my time.


More accusations..You're really only wasting your time.



posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 10:35 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik




"A look at the gun used in the Texas church shooting."


Now shut it.



posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 10:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: projectvxn
"A look at the gun used in the Texas church shooting."


Now shut it.

And they made it clear that they were showing some accessories available, "some common, some rare". Did you miss that in your rush to hammer out the OP?


edit on 8-11-2017 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 10:38 PM
link   
a reply to: projectvxn

"Liberal Media - Stop Embarrassing Yourselves"

OK who is the embarrassing one, the liberal media or the OP caught spinning (lying?)?



posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 10:40 PM
link   
a reply to: jacquesdarippa




OK who is the embarrassing one


That would be those who either didn't read the OP or fail to comprehend what was written.



posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 10:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: projectvxn
"A look at the gun used in the Texas church shooting."


Now shut it.

And they made it clear that they were showing some accessories available, "some common, some rare". Did you miss that in your rush to hammer out the OP?



I know anti gun propaganda when I see it.

I will call it out when I do.

Which ones are common? Which are rare? How do they fit into the context of the Texas church shooting?

It doesn't. At All.



posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 10:43 PM
link   
USA TODAY‏Verified account @USATODAY 8h8 hours ago
Replying to @USATODAY

To clarify, the video shows both the shooter’s modifications, as well as other possible modifications. The shooter did not use a chainsaw bayonet.


Did you conveniently miss that part?

Again what you stated..




This story shows an image that USA Today used to depict the rifle used by the gunman in Sunderland, Texas. It's an AR15 with a god damned chainsaw bayonet. A chainsaw bayonet folks.
REALLY?
What do you think this is the Evil Dead? Is Ash Williams your damned gun expert? What's scary is that this isn't even close to the most embarrassing thing that a member of the liberal media has done in the name of promoting their anti-gun agenda.
Is it too much to ask that you don't embarrass yourselves? Trying to do you idiots a favor here.


Again who is embarrassing themselves?
edit on 8-11-2017 by jacquesdarippa because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 10:43 PM
link   
a reply to: projectvxn



You're accusing me of lying about something YOU made up. I'm not playing this stupid game with you.



Obviously you are.

Either you knew it existed and failed to provide the proper context in the OP, in order to push your political partisanship, which you accuse the media of doing, or your didn't know and are now wasting our time with idiotic arguments trying to cover your ass.

Did you know or not? If you did, why didn't you present the OP in a factual manner?



Only the embarrassing bull# that it is.

Also: "A look at the gun used in the Texas church shooting."


Not quite as embarrassing as your OP.

You made false claims.



More accusations..You're really only wasting your time.


True.

Arguing with those that are dishonest is a waste of time, but I have hope one or two will have the balls to admit it.



posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 10:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: projectvxn
I know anti gun propaganda when I see it.

I will call it out when I do.

Yes it was and good for you but we are not the general public here.


Which ones are common? Which are rare? How do they fit into the context of the Texas church shooting?

It doesn't. At All.

We know and that is why your OP fell flat with us.



posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 10:46 PM
link   
a reply to: jacquesdarippa
Accusing me of lying about something that you made up on the spot as an accusation.

I watch youtube. I knew about the chainsaw.

The OP had nothing to do with whether the accessory existed. But by how the whole thing was presented.

All of this, because you can't read and separate one part of an OP from another in the same post.



posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 10:46 PM
link   
a reply to: projectvxn

What you did was straight out lie about what they did. There is no two ways around that fact.

The lie...




This story shows an image that USA Today used to depict the rifle used by the gunman in Sunderland, Texas. It's an AR15 with a god damned chainsaw bayonet. A chainsaw bayonet folks. REALLY?


The truth...

The video you are talking about




USA TODAY‏ Verified account @USATODAY 8h8 hours ago Replying to @USATODAY

To clarify, the video shows both the shooter’s modifications, as well as other possible modifications. The shooter did not use a chainsaw bayonet.



posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 10:47 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik




We know and that is why your OP fell flat with us.


Who's us? 3 of you?

The reply is indicative of continued lack of reading comprehension skills.



posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 10:48 PM
link   
a reply to: jacquesdarippa


This story shows an image that USA Today used to depict the rifle used by the gunman in Sunderland, Texas.


-citation needed.




Again who is embarrassing themselves?


As was before as is now, those that lack the comprehension of words...n stuff.




top topics



 
39
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join