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.
originally posted by: ScepticScot
originally posted by: Wardaddy454
originally posted by: ScepticScot
originally posted by: Wardaddy454
originally posted by: ScepticScot
originally posted by: DISRAELI
originally posted by: UKTruth
What is this country coming to when we detain people for opinions???
I would like to see the official reason for the detention. It might not have been put in those terms.
I suspect it will have been under the public safety remit where they believe there is a risk of incitement of violence.
People can argue about the right or wrong of that, but I suspect many of those complaining would be the first to applaud if it was an Islamic preacher detained for the same reason.
Well one is just a journalist, with whom one can agree or disagree with. The other leads a group of people along their line of thinking. Should that Imam believe in Jihad against the west, at least some might develop those same beliefs. Of course in both instances proof is required before detainment. Its really apples to oranges, but nice try.
Nope completely comparable preaching hate is preaching hate
Prove that the journalist was preaching hate. And by that I mean the general standard of hate, not your own personal standard, because that would be nonsense in a debate.
I do know the rules for detaining someone require more than just they are going to interview someone.
originally posted by: ScepticScot
originally posted by: UKTruth
originally posted by: ScepticScot
originally posted by: Wardaddy454
originally posted by: ScepticScot
originally posted by: DISRAELI
originally posted by: UKTruth
What is this country coming to when we detain people for opinions???
I would like to see the official reason for the detention. It might not have been put in those terms.
I suspect it will have been under the public safety remit where they believe there is a risk of incitement of violence.
People can argue about the right or wrong of that, but I suspect many of those complaining would be the first to applaud if it was an Islamic preacher detained for the same reason.
Well one is just a journalist, with whom one can agree or disagree with. The other leads a group of people along their line of thinking. Should that Imam believe in Jihad against the west, at least some might develop those same beliefs. Of course in both instances proof is required before detainment. Its really apples to oranges, but nice try.
Nope completely comparable preaching hate is preaching hate
What hate was she preaching that warranted her arrest and imprisonment for 3 days?
See answer above.
originally posted by: UKTruth
originally posted by: ScepticScot
originally posted by: Wardaddy454
originally posted by: ScepticScot
originally posted by: Wardaddy454
originally posted by: ScepticScot
originally posted by: DISRAELI
originally posted by: UKTruth
What is this country coming to when we detain people for opinions???
I would like to see the official reason for the detention. It might not have been put in those terms.
I suspect it will have been under the public safety remit where they believe there is a risk of incitement of violence.
People can argue about the right or wrong of that, but I suspect many of those complaining would be the first to applaud if it was an Islamic preacher detained for the same reason.
Well one is just a journalist, with whom one can agree or disagree with. The other leads a group of people along their line of thinking. Should that Imam believe in Jihad against the west, at least some might develop those same beliefs. Of course in both instances proof is required before detainment. Its really apples to oranges, but nice try.
Nope completely comparable preaching hate is preaching hate
Prove that the journalist was preaching hate. And by that I mean the general standard of hate, not your own personal standard, because that would be nonsense in a debate.
I do know the rules for detaining someone require more than just they are going to interview someone.
Indeed, which is why this is such a disgrace.
You finally get it.
originally posted by: ScepticScot
originally posted by: UKTruth
originally posted by: ScepticScot
originally posted by: Wardaddy454
originally posted by: ScepticScot
originally posted by: Wardaddy454
originally posted by: ScepticScot
originally posted by: DISRAELI
originally posted by: UKTruth
What is this country coming to when we detain people for opinions???
I would like to see the official reason for the detention. It might not have been put in those terms.
I suspect it will have been under the public safety remit where they believe there is a risk of incitement of violence.
People can argue about the right or wrong of that, but I suspect many of those complaining would be the first to applaud if it was an Islamic preacher detained for the same reason.
Well one is just a journalist, with whom one can agree or disagree with. The other leads a group of people along their line of thinking. Should that Imam believe in Jihad against the west, at least some might develop those same beliefs. Of course in both instances proof is required before detainment. Its really apples to oranges, but nice try.
Nope completely comparable preaching hate is preaching hate
Prove that the journalist was preaching hate. And by that I mean the general standard of hate, not your own personal standard, because that would be nonsense in a debate.
I do know the rules for detaining someone require more than just they are going to interview someone.
Indeed, which is why this is such a disgrace.
You finally get it.
You are the one claiming they are being detained for planning an interview. Show the evidence of you claim.
originally posted by: SatansPride
a reply to: Wardaddy454
Ya right lol I will just watch time lol
originally posted by: ScepticScot
originally posted by: Wardaddy454
originally posted by: ScepticScot
originally posted by: Wardaddy454
originally posted by: ScepticScot
originally posted by: DISRAELI
originally posted by: UKTruth
What is this country coming to when we detain people for opinions???
I would like to see the official reason for the detention. It might not have been put in those terms.
I suspect it will have been under the public safety remit where they believe there is a risk of incitement of violence.
People can argue about the right or wrong of that, but I suspect many of those complaining would be the first to applaud if it was an Islamic preacher detained for the same reason.
Well one is just a journalist, with whom one can agree or disagree with. The other leads a group of people along their line of thinking. Should that Imam believe in Jihad against the west, at least some might develop those same beliefs. Of course in both instances proof is required before detainment. Its really apples to oranges, but nice try.
Nope completely comparable preaching hate is preaching hate
Prove that the journalist was preaching hate. And by that I mean the general standard of hate, not your own personal standard, because that would be nonsense in a debate.
I don't have to prove anything as I am not a lawyer involved in the case. I do know the rules for detaining someone require more than just they are going to interview someone.
originally posted by: Wardaddy454
originally posted by: ScepticScot
originally posted by: Wardaddy454
originally posted by: ScepticScot
originally posted by: Wardaddy454
originally posted by: ScepticScot
originally posted by: DISRAELI
originally posted by: UKTruth
What is this country coming to when we detain people for opinions???
I would like to see the official reason for the detention. It might not have been put in those terms.
I suspect it will have been under the public safety remit where they believe there is a risk of incitement of violence.
People can argue about the right or wrong of that, but I suspect many of those complaining would be the first to applaud if it was an Islamic preacher detained for the same reason.
Well one is just a journalist, with whom one can agree or disagree with. The other leads a group of people along their line of thinking. Should that Imam believe in Jihad against the west, at least some might develop those same beliefs. Of course in both instances proof is required before detainment. Its really apples to oranges, but nice try.
Nope completely comparable preaching hate is preaching hate
Prove that the journalist was preaching hate. And by that I mean the general standard of hate, not your own personal standard, because that would be nonsense in a debate.
I don't have to prove anything as I am not a lawyer involved in the case. I do know the rules for detaining someone require more than just they are going to interview someone.
You're making the claim that she preaches hate. If that were true, it should be easy enough to prove with verifiable evidence.
originally posted by: UKTruth
originally posted by: Wardaddy454
originally posted by: ScepticScot
originally posted by: Wardaddy454
originally posted by: ScepticScot
originally posted by: Wardaddy454
originally posted by: ScepticScot
originally posted by: DISRAELI
originally posted by: UKTruth
What is this country coming to when we detain people for opinions???
I would like to see the official reason for the detention. It might not have been put in those terms.
I suspect it will have been under the public safety remit where they believe there is a risk of incitement of violence.
People can argue about the right or wrong of that, but I suspect many of those complaining would be the first to applaud if it was an Islamic preacher detained for the same reason.
Well one is just a journalist, with whom one can agree or disagree with. The other leads a group of people along their line of thinking. Should that Imam believe in Jihad against the west, at least some might develop those same beliefs. Of course in both instances proof is required before detainment. Its really apples to oranges, but nice try.
Nope completely comparable preaching hate is preaching hate
Prove that the journalist was preaching hate. And by that I mean the general standard of hate, not your own personal standard, because that would be nonsense in a debate.
I don't have to prove anything as I am not a lawyer involved in the case. I do know the rules for detaining someone require more than just they are going to interview someone.
You're making the claim that she preaches hate. If that were true, it should be easy enough to prove with verifiable evidence.
There lies the problem. She talks about life, liberty and justice... about God and family values. That is pure hate to some, and they applaud when their violent reactions to peaceful discussion forces the arrest of innocents who disagree with them. You see, to them, hate speech is something they don't like the sound of. These people are truly sick and evil.
originally posted by: Wardaddy454
originally posted by: UKTruth
originally posted by: Wardaddy454
originally posted by: ScepticScot
originally posted by: Wardaddy454
originally posted by: ScepticScot
originally posted by: Wardaddy454
originally posted by: ScepticScot
originally posted by: DISRAELI
originally posted by: UKTruth
What is this country coming to when we detain people for opinions???
I would like to see the official reason for the detention. It might not have been put in those terms.
I suspect it will have been under the public safety remit where they believe there is a risk of incitement of violence.
People can argue about the right or wrong of that, but I suspect many of those complaining would be the first to applaud if it was an Islamic preacher detained for the same reason.
Well one is just a journalist, with whom one can agree or disagree with. The other leads a group of people along their line of thinking. Should that Imam believe in Jihad against the west, at least some might develop those same beliefs. Of course in both instances proof is required before detainment. Its really apples to oranges, but nice try.
Nope completely comparable preaching hate is preaching hate
Prove that the journalist was preaching hate. And by that I mean the general standard of hate, not your own personal standard, because that would be nonsense in a debate.
I don't have to prove anything as I am not a lawyer involved in the case. I do know the rules for detaining someone require more than just they are going to interview someone.
You're making the claim that she preaches hate. If that were true, it should be easy enough to prove with verifiable evidence.
There lies the problem. She talks about life, liberty and justice... about God and family values. That is pure hate to some, and they applaud when their violent reactions to peaceful discussion forces the arrest of innocents who disagree with them. You see, to them, hate speech is something they don't like the sound of. These people are truly sick and evil.
No offense to you and yours UKTruth, but I can't help seeing a bit of Nazi Germany beginning to manifest in an attempt to not become Nazi Germany in this situation.
originally posted by: SatansPride
a reply to: Wardaddy454
Not for a lil while at least, patience is a virtue. Remember?
originally posted by: UKTruth
originally posted by: Wardaddy454
originally posted by: UKTruth
originally posted by: Wardaddy454
originally posted by: ScepticScot
originally posted by: Wardaddy454
originally posted by: ScepticScot
originally posted by: Wardaddy454
originally posted by: ScepticScot
originally posted by: DISRAELI
originally posted by: UKTruth
What is this country coming to when we detain people for opinions???
I would like to see the official reason for the detention. It might not have been put in those terms.
I suspect it will have been under the public safety remit where they believe there is a risk of incitement of violence.
People can argue about the right or wrong of that, but I suspect many of those complaining would be the first to applaud if it was an Islamic preacher detained for the same reason.
Well one is just a journalist, with whom one can agree or disagree with. The other leads a group of people along their line of thinking. Should that Imam believe in Jihad against the west, at least some might develop those same beliefs. Of course in both instances proof is required before detainment. Its really apples to oranges, but nice try.
Nope completely comparable preaching hate is preaching hate
Prove that the journalist was preaching hate. And by that I mean the general standard of hate, not your own personal standard, because that would be nonsense in a debate.
I don't have to prove anything as I am not a lawyer involved in the case. I do know the rules for detaining someone require more than just they are going to interview someone.
You're making the claim that she preaches hate. If that were true, it should be easy enough to prove with verifiable evidence.
There lies the problem. She talks about life, liberty and justice... about God and family values. That is pure hate to some, and they applaud when their violent reactions to peaceful discussion forces the arrest of innocents who disagree with them. You see, to them, hate speech is something they don't like the sound of. These people are truly sick and evil.
No offense to you and yours UKTruth, but I can't help seeing a bit of Nazi Germany beginning to manifest in an attempt to not become Nazi Germany in this situation.
More or less, but more specifically I think it is a bit of Nazi Germany manifesting by design, whilst pretending to be anti-fascist.
originally posted by: Liquesence
The OP has no link, just a YT video.
Upon a search, the only places "covering" this are GWP, Breitbart, and minimal other fringe RW blogs.
Figures. Carry on.
originally posted by: Liquesence
The OP has no link, just a YT video.
Upon a search, the only places "covering" this are GWP, Breitbart, and minimal other fringe RW blogs.
Figures. Carry on.
originally posted by: UKTruth
originally posted by: Liquesence
The OP has no link, just a YT video.
Upon a search, the only places "covering" this are GWP, Breitbart, and minimal other fringe RW blogs.
Figures. Carry on.
There are links and videos all through the thread of the actual people who were arrested telling their story. I guess I will have to wait till CNN tells me it's real. Jesus, you guys are funny.