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.

 

Donald Trump retweets far-right ultra nationalist group Britain First videos , Oi Vey !

page: 27
108
<< 24  25  26    28  29  30 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 29 2017 @ 03:07 PM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

9 times out of 10 Britain First videos are fake news.

He doesn't need to use the word deplorable, he already expressed himself via sharing Britain First videos.

Of which are fake and are ALWAYS pushed to make out that Muslims are destroying Britain with Sharia law.

Which is utter BS.




posted on Nov, 29 2017 @ 03:08 PM
link   
a reply to: SprocketUK

You're right. It was Netherlands. Islam only accounts for 4% of the population there.



posted on Nov, 29 2017 @ 03:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: SprocketUK

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: SprocketUK

But I can look at demographics and see that Muslims make up about 7% (at most) of Belgium's population. So the assumption that he is not Muslim is much safer than the one that he is Muslim. So if that's the case, why do Right Wing groups continue to use this video to push their anti-Islam position?


You could do that, though the video was from the Netherlands, wasn't it? Not Belgium.
What is the likelihood of a person of that skin shade being muslim or non native heritage in Holland? I confess I don't know and I also know that Islam isn't a race, and furthermore, the sort of people who describe themselves as muslims and indulge in streetcrime and general objectionable behaviour tend not to take their religion's teaching's seriously or, in some cases follow the jihadist versions.



You basically said they ain't Muslim



posted on Nov, 29 2017 @ 03:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

I don't see anyone losing their minds. I see a discussion where people on the left are pointing out inappropriate behavior from our President and his supporters are doing everything possible to deny that he did anything inappropriate. I see some rising emotions from this conflict, but the tweet itself is just more of the same from Trump.


Im not his supporter, and I say he didn't do anything inappropriate in this case. I also think you guys paying so much attention to his Twitter is hilarious, real life satire.



posted on Nov, 29 2017 @ 03:09 PM
link   
Trump is a effin genius, was are talking Kaufman level genius. He does not even have to try to troll liberals anymore, it is almost as if he does things faster than self hating white people can pretend to be offended.


On a side note, Trump is "racist" for retweeting videos of muslims doing what muslims do. Reminds me of the time i was racist because a black guy broke into my car.

edit on 29-11-2017 by TheMZA because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 29 2017 @ 03:09 PM
link   
a reply to: gortex

I really hate when Trump does this kind of thing. I like a lot of the Trump supporters on ATS and this is the kind of stuff that I don't like seeing them feel compelled to have to explain and/or defend. Trump knows he is putting them in a crappy position.

However, I am grateful for the reminder that I should never give Trump any of my trust or confidence. Ever. If Trump was really draining the swamp, he wouldn't continue to perpetuate the Muslim scapegoat stuff that the swamp has been using for decades to cover up their massive criminal enterprise.

Just my .02¢ that I am sure won't be very well received by anyone.



posted on Nov, 29 2017 @ 03:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

originally posted by: theantediluvian

By your own logic, the GOP is equivalent to the Nazi Party. After all, I can find some straight up Nazi ideology coming from plenty of GOPers. We can play a game if you'd like. You can post every bit of vile racism that you can find coming from somebody affiliated with BLM and I'll not only match it with similar from the GOP, I'll give you 3 examples for every 1 you come up with for BLM. Hell, I can probably do better than that.


And then I can do scientific pieces one after another breaking down how liberal identity politics is the same animal as that which the Nazi's invented, and watch you avoid them like the plague for a year.

I hope you know using science to justify why a social group/demographic is bad is EXACTLY how the Nazis justified their extermination reasons. Perhaps you've heard of phrenology?


I speak to well understood social group manipulation practices (cultish mind control techniques), and I do it with numerous overlapping fields of psychology / social psychology / sociology / etc.

And its the boogeyman:


originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: Kettu

When you see me effectively paint Maoists, Nazi's, Leninist's, Facist's and Stalinist's all with the same brush, why would you insinuate this is a pro-Alt Right piece?

Now I do more go after the SJWFRONT as their scene has total dominance across the universities, their ideology is being socially engineered into grade school children of all ages, its them trolling white supremacy back into existence not the other way around, and so on.

But if you were to actually dig into my works in Identity Politics you'll see me frequently cite my 2007 piece where I was first coming to realize this model I've now come to call "Hyper-Tribalism", where at the time I was calling out the Neocon's for following the Nazi model to a T except for the most radicalizing identity: RACE. They stopped short of that one, the strong appeal to religion being part of their 'ideological identity complex', which had Republican followers many of them messaging me telling me off about how Bush was God's Man that God Himself rigged the election in 2000, type BS. You get similar effects with other mass identities merged into the political ideology, but the most violently radicalizing of all is surely RACE. And the Democrat Machine they actually went there, and beyond with all this gender and orgasm stuff.

Now conservatism does traditional have more of a stern fatherly 'style' to the liberal 'motherly' style to it. Yet the most recent study shows todays liberals as having more authoritarian tendencies than their polar opposite. Which is mighty interesting in psychology terms.

But in the realm of social psychology, like all large group structures the conservative types certainly appeal to hierarchy. And this would seem to be a strong parallel with the Nazi's; they were monsters of hierarchy from race to etc. Now all herein appeal to groupthink no doubt, but when I look at the COmmie's they have less appeal to hierarchy and more appeal to The Crowd (which they merely divided up as "soldier, worker, farmer" assuming the bourgeois were eliminated). I believe they call it Collectivism.

Now the SJW permutation of all of this is interesting in this light, as they do often openly use the word collectism, and the identity politics stuff is raw appeal to groupthink, yet they do also embody an appeal to hierarchy considering the "Progressive Stack" AKA the "Oppression Olympics". Since they bring race into the mix ala Nazism, their identity politics model more closely resembles the model the Nazi's invented, this seems like it would be the predictable case in such a proposition. And of course we have evidence to demonstrate such a posit:




www.abovetopsecret.com...


edit on 29-11-2017 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 29 2017 @ 03:11 PM
link   
a reply to: TheMZA

Genius?

Or a xenophobic bigot?

I think it's the latter, I've had over a year of him being an idiot to support my view.
edit on 29-11-2017 by RAY1990 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 29 2017 @ 03:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: SprocketUK

You're right. It was Netherlands. Islam only accounts for 4% of the population there.


And the other bit? I doubt there is a measure of the percentage of non whites identifying as muslim, but my earlier point stands, saying that this criminal was definitely a non muslim is wrong as you can't reliably prove that. (Yes I know you cant say he was with any certainty either) The problem is, that the debunking should have taken the form of "There is no proof this wasn't a muslim" rather than "This was not a muslim"



posted on Nov, 29 2017 @ 03:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: SprocketUK

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: SprocketUK

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: SprocketUK

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: SprocketUK

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: SprocketUK

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: SprocketUK




Also his retweet of their vids could have been ten retweets removed from the original.

He retweeted Jayda Fransen , Deputy Leader of Britain First


Directly? as in he follows her? or was it a retweet of her original someone on his feed tweeted?

He retweeted both sources. Coulter only retweeted one video. Trump added an additional two videos to his tweets that came from Britain First. So he retweeted Coulter then went to Britain First, likely watched a few more videos, then tweeted them too.

you got a source for that?

Ann Coulter's twitter. One video.


A source for him going to the Britain First site and posting the vids from there?

Why do I need that? Where else would he have gotten them from? Simple deductive reasoning shows that if they didn't come from Ann Coulter's twitter then they came from Britain First. Do you think he just randomly guessed the url's of those videos before putting them in his Twitter or something? Or are you just trying to argue for the sake of arguing here? I'm guessing it is the latter.


You need to do it because you made the allegation that this is what he did.

I quote

"So he retweeted Coulter then went to Britain First, likely watched a few more videos, then tweeted them too."

So you can either show how you came to that conclusion or admit you made stuff up to try and win an argument on the internet.

Heh. So now you are confirming you are just arguing for the sake of arguing. Either that or you don't know what the definition of the word "likely" is.


Thanks for clearing that up, you have zero proof and are just spouting what you think is the most negative thing you can about what he tweeted. Damn, do you not see the hypocrisy here?

No. I'm using logic. I know in this day and age, it is easier to assume your biases are true and run with that, but I use logic to form my opinions. If the three videos originated on Britain First, Ann Coulter (who is one of the 40 some people Trump is following) retweets one of them, then it reasons Trump pulled the other two videos off of Britain First after being exposed to them by Ann Coulter's tweet. It's really not that high of a leap of logic, but because you don't want to believe it is true you demand sources for it, and since I used the word "likely" I'm admitting that it isn't 100% confirmed.

Like I said you are just arguing for the sake of arguing.



posted on Nov, 29 2017 @ 03:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

I don't see anyone losing their minds. I see a discussion where people on the left are pointing out inappropriate behavior from our President and his supporters are doing everything possible to deny that he did anything inappropriate. I see some rising emotions from this conflict, but the tweet itself is just more of the same from Trump.


I see a discussion where people on the right are asking for proof of the OP's claims, yet they can't be provided. You personally told me he retweeted Ann Coulter, then the OP gets on and says he retweeted someone else. It would be nice if you guys could at least stick to the same story line if you're gonna just assume things and claim them as facts.



posted on Nov, 29 2017 @ 03:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: RAY1990

originally posted by: SprocketUK

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: SprocketUK

But I can look at demographics and see that Muslims make up about 7% (at most) of Belgium's population. So the assumption that he is not Muslim is much safer than the one that he is Muslim. So if that's the case, why do Right Wing groups continue to use this video to push their anti-Islam position?


You could do that, though the video was from the Netherlands, wasn't it? Not Belgium.
What is the likelihood of a person of that skin shade being muslim or non native heritage in Holland? I confess I don't know and I also know that Islam isn't a race, and furthermore, the sort of people who describe themselves as muslims and indulge in streetcrime and general objectionable behaviour tend not to take their religion's teaching's seriously or, in some cases follow the jihadist versions.



You basically said they ain't Muslim


Well, he isn't like the ones I know, but then again neither are the morons who blow themselves up in streets.
I don't know he is muslim and while its wrong to paint him as one without actual proof, its every bit as wrong to try and say there is proof he isn't one when that prof doesn't exist.
edit on 56pWed, 29 Nov 2017 15:14:56 -060020172017-11-29T15:14:56-06:00kAmerica/Chicago30000000k by SprocketUK because: cant even spell moron anymore



posted on Nov, 29 2017 @ 03:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: gortex

I really hate when Trump does this kind of thing. I like a lot of the Trump supporters on ATS and this is the kind of stuff that I don't like seeing them feel compelled to have to explain and/or defend. Trump knows he is putting them in a crappy position.

However, I am grateful for the reminder that I should never give Trump any of my trust or confidence. Ever. If Trump was really draining the swamp, he wouldn't continue to perpetuate the Muslim scapegoat stuff that the swamp has been using for decades to cover up their massive criminal enterprise.

Just my .02¢ that I am sure won't be very well received by anyone.


I'd be a lot more concerned about Trump's games for what they are, if they werent making so clear that we have a major mass psychology disaster on our hands, which he does stoke, yet he didn't invent the SJW mentality (which is but the biggest climax so far of the underlying problem / program gutting out our society).

As old as he is, it must be quite strange to him since it blows even me away daily, meaning he seriously might not even be able to help himself anymore. Especially with all the heat they'd give him even if he werent, its about the only sweet justice he can even derive from the thing.

Much like he's triggered the MSM + GOP + DNC into exposing themselves, eating themselves, while still tearing each other apart, in trying to stop him.

So I cant not give him some wiggle room on this not exactly professional behavior.

America's is sociopsychologically fazooked after the decades of social engineering that came before him, and he really is exposing it, is why I cant stop looking at the whole circus. There's never been a time like it for non-ideologue social psychologist types. Historical times for Homo sapiens.


edit on 29-11-2017 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 29 2017 @ 03:16 PM
link   
a reply to: SprocketUK

Stereotyping people gets you into a right muddle at times.

Anyone can be a Muslim.



posted on Nov, 29 2017 @ 03:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: RAY1990
a reply to: TheMZA
Or a xenophobic bigot?

I think it's the latter, I've had over a year of him being an idiot to support my view.


You are responding well to your media conditioning. Does it over get boring saying the same 4 adjectives over and over?
I am glad your re-educators stopped having you guys use the word "deplorable" as much as possible.



posted on Nov, 29 2017 @ 03:17 PM
link   
Bunch of yanks that have not clue the site he gave credit too are a hate group who's leaders keep getting jailed.
Only imbeciles, the lowest of the low believe that rubbish that Britain First post.

They are a joke in this country and yes they are a far right white supremacy group so yes they are the KKK equivalent.

When a British MP was murdered in the street a couple of years back it was via a member of this group.
When asked his name in court he replied "Britain is for Britain, death to traitors"

I honestly cannot believe anyone is defending these guys and many of you have gone way down in my estimation, to the point I'm reconsidering posting here from now on.



posted on Nov, 29 2017 @ 03:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

I don't see anyone losing their minds. I see a discussion where people on the left are pointing out inappropriate behavior from our President and his supporters are doing everything possible to deny that he did anything inappropriate. I see some rising emotions from this conflict, but the tweet itself is just more of the same from Trump.


Im not his supporter, and I say he didn't do anything inappropriate in this case. I also think you guys paying so much attention to his Twitter is hilarious, real life satire.

You may not take it seriously, but there are QUITE a few Trump supporters in this country who do take it seriously and gospel truth. The reason we are upset is because those people are being duped by Trump's antics and you are just standing by and laughing at us trying to clean up the narrative.



posted on Nov, 29 2017 @ 03:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: SprocketUK

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: SprocketUK

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: SprocketUK

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: SprocketUK

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: SprocketUK

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: SprocketUK




Also his retweet of their vids could have been ten retweets removed from the original.

He retweeted Jayda Fransen , Deputy Leader of Britain First


Directly? as in he follows her? or was it a retweet of her original someone on his feed tweeted?

He retweeted both sources. Coulter only retweeted one video. Trump added an additional two videos to his tweets that came from Britain First. So he retweeted Coulter then went to Britain First, likely watched a few more videos, then tweeted them too.

you got a source for that?

Ann Coulter's twitter. One video.


A source for him going to the Britain First site and posting the vids from there?

Why do I need that? Where else would he have gotten them from? Simple deductive reasoning shows that if they didn't come from Ann Coulter's twitter then they came from Britain First. Do you think he just randomly guessed the url's of those videos before putting them in his Twitter or something? Or are you just trying to argue for the sake of arguing here? I'm guessing it is the latter.


You need to do it because you made the allegation that this is what he did.

I quote

"So he retweeted Coulter then went to Britain First, likely watched a few more videos, then tweeted them too."

So you can either show how you came to that conclusion or admit you made stuff up to try and win an argument on the internet.

Heh. So now you are confirming you are just arguing for the sake of arguing. Either that or you don't know what the definition of the word "likely" is.


Thanks for clearing that up, you have zero proof and are just spouting what you think is the most negative thing you can about what he tweeted. Damn, do you not see the hypocrisy here?

No. I'm using logic. I know in this day and age, it is easier to assume your biases are true and run with that, but I use logic to form my opinions. If the three videos originated on Britain First, Ann Coulter (who is one of the 40 some people Trump is following) retweets one of them, then it reasons Trump pulled the other two videos off of Britain First after being exposed to them by Ann Coulter's tweet. It's really not that high of a leap of logic, but because you don't want to believe it is true you demand sources for it, and since I used the word "likely" I'm admitting that it isn't 100% confirmed.

Like I said you are just arguing for the sake of arguing.


My dog is more logical than you.

You made an assertion and portrayed it as fact. Now you are trying to pretend its just me being ornery.
You re tweet anything and chances are, in the next five minutes twitter will notify you of similar things. There is no evidence he trawled BF.

As an experiment, search for a pic of "cats who look like Hitler" on twitter, re tweet it and then see what twitter comes up with in the next few minutes....Its how it works.



posted on Nov, 29 2017 @ 03:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: Middleoftheroad

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

I don't see anyone losing their minds. I see a discussion where people on the left are pointing out inappropriate behavior from our President and his supporters are doing everything possible to deny that he did anything inappropriate. I see some rising emotions from this conflict, but the tweet itself is just more of the same from Trump.


I see a discussion where people on the right are asking for proof of the OP's claims, yet they can't be provided. You personally told me he retweeted Ann Coulter, then the OP gets on and says he retweeted someone else. It would be nice if you guys could at least stick to the same story line if you're gonna just assume things and claim them as facts.

If you don't see evidence of the OP's claims then you don't want to see them. I've posted both Trump and Ann Coulter's twitter in this thread. These things were tweeted. Sarah Huckabee Sanders defended the possibility of these videos being fake as justified to sell Trump's narrative. I ALSO posted a link to that story as well.



posted on Nov, 29 2017 @ 03:19 PM
link   
According to the site that originally posted the video the boy punching is not a muslim.
They are just a bunch of highschool kids bullying some poor kid on crutches

Source




top topics



 
108
<< 24  25  26    28  29  30 >>

log in

join