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.

 

MSNBC Reporter Busts Narrative, Admits Migrants Are Mostly Men

page: 2
47
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 26 2018 @ 09:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: RMFX1

originally posted by: IAMTAT
...but Trump is still mostly gassing the children....Right?

Jesus #ing christ man. A little bit too far with that comment don't you think?

You made yourself look like a complete idiot.

And yes I know that you were being sarcastic. It's low hanging fruit buddy. You need to work on your aperture.


I'm fairly certain that IMTAT said this in jest to all the media and gov. lefties trying to compare Trump to the nazis and the holocaust. I think you took it the wrong way.




posted on Nov, 26 2018 @ 09:53 PM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut

roflol

🤦‍♀️💨



posted on Nov, 26 2018 @ 09:54 PM
link   
a reply to: mtnshredder

Yes , it takes a Keen Eye to Spot Sarcasm here on ATS . At Least One of them that Works......



posted on Nov, 26 2018 @ 09:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: RMFX1

originally posted by: IAMTAT
...but Trump is still mostly gassing the children....Right?

Jesus #ing christ man. A little bit too far with that comment don't you think?

You made yourself look like a complete idiot.

And yes I know that you were being sarcastic. It's low hanging fruit buddy. You need to work on your apertour.


Trump applies broad definitions of criminality to a large group of people.

Why not do the same in reverse. They used gas indescriminantly. It affected some women and children. It was done in support of policies that Trump wants enforced, ergo; Trump gasses children.

Except it is not a broad description of criminality. It is spelled out specifically in our legal code. And why would you bring women and children to the front lines of this? They know they're breaking our laws. They know they're invading our country. They attacked our law enforcement officials. This same scenario literally happened under the Obama administration and nobody said a thing (tear gas and all).



posted on Nov, 26 2018 @ 10:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: chr0naut

roflol

🤦‍♀️💨


I used the site search feature for all the terms. Didn't get any hits except for "troop deployments" (all 4 hits from 2011) and "known criminals" again 4 hits but, again, from 2011.

Try harder next time.




posted on Nov, 26 2018 @ 10:07 PM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut

Well, shoot! I'm convinced let's let all 2,000 or more in because there might be 1 legit asylum seeker trying to break our laws instead of following legal procedure which makes them sooooo sympathetic. /sarc

There's a reason why you have the procedure in place. It's precisely so you don't have to allow 1,999 illegitmate claims into your country to disappear never to be seen again (yes, that's what they do) so you can perhaps process the 1 legit claim who may or may not actually follow the process instead of disappearing with the other 1,999.



posted on Nov, 26 2018 @ 10:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: RMFX1

originally posted by: IAMTAT
...but Trump is still mostly gassing the children....Right?

Jesus #ing christ man. A little bit too far with that comment don't you think?

You made yourself look like a complete idiot.

And yes I know that you were being sarcastic. It's low hanging fruit buddy. You need to work on your apertour.


Trump applies broad definitions of criminality to a large group of people.

Why not do the same in reverse. They used gas indescriminantly. It affected some women and children. It was done in support of policies that Trump wants enforced, ergo; Trump gasses children.


Trump didn't gas anyone.. Trump is sitting in his office.
The local police/riot/border patrol fired tear gas to disperse a violent mob throwing projectiles



posted on Nov, 26 2018 @ 10:10 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

Ever try to get Served in a Bar in the 70;s being Underage ? Where there is a Will , there is a Way.....



posted on Nov, 26 2018 @ 10:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Zanti Misfit

Nope. I was too underage to even think about that in the '70s. Mastering the word "NO" was the extent of my bad self's rebellion at that point in time.

But when I got to that time in my life, there were better ways to get my illegal booze hookups than to try to weasel it out of a bar.
edit on 26-11-2018 by ketsuko because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 26 2018 @ 10:24 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

The Point was , these Illegals WILL Find a way into the U.S. , at least the Fortunate ones .....



posted on Nov, 26 2018 @ 10:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: sine.nomine

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: RMFX1

originally posted by: IAMTAT
...but Trump is still mostly gassing the children....Right?

Jesus #ing christ man. A little bit too far with that comment don't you think?

You made yourself look like a complete idiot.

And yes I know that you were being sarcastic. It's low hanging fruit buddy. You need to work on your apertour.


Trump applies broad definitions of criminality to a large group of people.

Why not do the same in reverse. They used gas indescriminantly. It affected some women and children. It was done in support of policies that Trump wants enforced, ergo; Trump gasses children.

Except it is not a broad description of criminality. It is spelled out specifically in our legal code.


Trump quoted the legal code? Nope.


And why would you bring women and children to the front lines of this?


Front lines? So this is a battle? Where are the weapons and casualties?


They know they're breaking our laws.


They aren't even in your country. How could they possibly be breaking your laws?


They know they're invading our country.


They haven't put a foot onto US soil.

If they were invading, they'd cut communications, shell the border guards positions, mount snipers on high points to take out drones and troops and break through the barriers with armored troop carriers at high speed. Then they'd probably make a push for a major population center so they have a lot of lives to hold for ransom and for human shields. At the same time, the shock troops would push out along the border clearing defenses and barriers to open the entire border so everyone who wants can flood into America, unhindered. This would provide sufficient confusion for the perpetrators to disappear into the crowds when it later comes unstuck.

That's an invasion.


They attacked our law enforcement officials.


A few guys threw stones at armed and armored guards a defensive distance away?


This same scenario literally happened under the Obama administration and nobody said a thing (tear gas and all).


Obama never sent in troops, never closed the border, never blocked legitimate entrants and the bad guys were handled quietly.

Obama's policies and procedures were legal and humanitarian and were a targeted response aimed only at wrongdoers, not everyone in the vicinity like the current administration's clumsy media circus.

edit on 26/11/2018 by chr0naut because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 26 2018 @ 10:28 PM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut

Yes Obama did too.


🚨



posted on Nov, 26 2018 @ 10:33 PM
link   
I did notice while watching videos on TV and the net that a lot of males were in those caravan areas. About two thirds maybe. There are women with children, many of those kids are male teens too, and I would guess that many of those women have husbands too. My guess is about half single men over seventeen and the other half would include women, children, and husbands of the women. It almost seems like there is more male kids there too. So from my observation there are probably seventy percent males overall. Makes sense, a lot of women and girls would not want to make that trip.



posted on Nov, 26 2018 @ 10:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: Agit8dChop

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: RMFX1

originally posted by: IAMTAT
...but Trump is still mostly gassing the children....Right?

Jesus #ing christ man. A little bit too far with that comment don't you think?

You made yourself look like a complete idiot.

And yes I know that you were being sarcastic. It's low hanging fruit buddy. You need to work on your apertour.


Trump applies broad definitions of criminality to a large group of people.

Why not do the same in reverse. They used gas indescriminantly. It affected some women and children. It was done in support of policies that Trump wants enforced, ergo; Trump gasses children.


Trump didn't gas anyone.. Trump is sitting in his office.
The local police/riot/border patrol fired tear gas to disperse a violent mob throwing projectiles


I know that but similarly, no one has 'invaded' and, if they are not inside the US border, they also can't possibly illegal immigrants into the US.

And Trump can't charge anyone with being potential breakers of another country's laws.

The language that everyone is using is inflammatory and untrue.



posted on Nov, 26 2018 @ 10:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: chr0naut

Well, shoot! I'm convinced let's let all 2,000 or more in because there might be 1 legit asylum seeker trying to break our laws instead of following legal procedure which makes them sooooo sympathetic. /sarc

There's a reason why you have the procedure in place. It's precisely so you don't have to allow 1,999 illegitmate claims into your country to disappear never to be seen again (yes, that's what they do) so you can perhaps process the 1 legit claim who may or may not actually follow the process instead of disappearing with the other 1,999.


You are implying that they get let in to the US, just because they make a claim.

The whole process of applying for and being granted asylum is so that they can be given entry 'if they are accepted'. At the point where they are accepted they have already been fully documented and can then be given access.

What kind of idiocracy just gives them access before the process grants them access?



posted on Nov, 26 2018 @ 10:49 PM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut

I never said Trump quoted anything.

Front lines, yes. These are mostly military aged men flying the flags of their countries forcefully attempting to get into another country. What would you call it? Air B&B?

Immigration law is a thing. Yes, they are attempting to break our laws. Some have succeeded.

"A few guys threw stones"... That's not an attack? Our law enforcement didn't shoot the people, they tear gassed them. What do you want them to do, give them flowers?

Your entire response is absolutely ridiuclous.

How about you field a better solution?



posted on Nov, 26 2018 @ 10:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: chr0naut

Yes Obama did too.

🚨


Yes trump did three.



You still haven't provided any supportive links for anything yet.



posted on Nov, 26 2018 @ 10:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: xuenchen



originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: xuenchen

Of course, the assumption is that someone along the way must have said that the caravans were not mostly men, and no one did.

Even if there are only one or two women and children. How many innocents is it just and fair to prosecute because there are some bad dudes in the crowd?

Is it fair to either prosecute, or to bar, a single good and innocent person who has a genuine need for asylum?

Justice is to prosecute the bad and to assist the good.


roflol

people with genuine requests come the legal ways

🧙‍♂️🤦‍♂️



Except when someone blocks them from those legal ways. Then people with genuine requests get desperate.

You also didn't answer how many innocents it is fair and just to prosecute?



Well that's just tough luck now isn't it? A person doesn't have a God given right to enter the United States. If they can't get in the legal way, then they don't get in. Tough luck.

Take the offer of asylum Mexico provided.

How many poor illegals have you opened your doors for? Take any bums off the street to live with you lately?

None? Zero?

Alrighty then, if you won't put your money where your mouth is then you need to shut your mouth.

So sick of people like you. Lead by example. Until then shut your yap.



posted on Nov, 26 2018 @ 11:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Carcharadon

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: xuenchen



originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: xuenchen

Of course, the assumption is that someone along the way must have said that the caravans were not mostly men, and no one did.

Even if there are only one or two women and children. How many innocents is it just and fair to prosecute because there are some bad dudes in the crowd?

Is it fair to either prosecute, or to bar, a single good and innocent person who has a genuine need for asylum?

Justice is to prosecute the bad and to assist the good.


roflol

people with genuine requests come the legal ways

🧙‍♂️🤦‍♂️



Except when someone blocks them from those legal ways. Then people with genuine requests get desperate.

You also didn't answer how many innocents it is fair and just to prosecute?



Well that's just tough luck now isn't it? A person doesn't have a God given right to enter the United States. If they can't get in the legal way, then they don't get in. Tough luck.

Take the offer of asylum Mexico provided.

How many poor illegals have you opened your doors for? Take any bums off the street to live with you lately?

None? Zero?

Alrighty then, if you won't put your money where your mouth is then you need to shut your mouth.

So sick of people like you. Lead by example. Until then shut your yap.


Exactly. He doesn’t even live in the States. Probably never even been to the States. He has no stakes in this apart from libtarded screeching.

These people aren’t even being ‘blocked’ like he says. He’s a liar. They just don’t want to wait their turn in line. They were offered asylum by Mexico but refused it because Mexico is a sh#thole.

They must be racist.

Hopefully the border patrol gets a LOT tougher on these people. A LOT tougher.



posted on Nov, 26 2018 @ 11:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: sine.nomine
a reply to: chr0naut

I never said Trump quoted anything.


Perhaps he is functionally illiterate due to the onset of dementia? Maybe he has just been drinking far too much covfefe? Who knows but his doctor (who apparently employs Trump as a ghost writer).




Front lines, yes. These are mostly military aged men flying the flags of their countries forcefully attempting to get into another country. What would you call it? Air B&B?


Military aged men flying the flags of their country. That sounds like the Eagle Scouts.

I wouldn't call it anything it was not, not even the 'Pink Wobbly Llama Brigade' or the 'Rolling Juggernaut Super Death Squad'. Calling it something that it is not is what you guys keep doing, not me.


Immigration law is a thing. Yes, they are attempting to break our laws. Some have succeeded.


The ones that have broken your laws, are law breakers.

The ones who have not broken your laws, although you might be worried that they could, are not law breakers.

Charging and prosecuting people who have not broken laws, is bigly bad. It is a crime under US law and is naughty.

This is why I am concerned that Trump is doing something naughty when he writes up executive orders that do not differentiate between those who have done wrong, and those who have not done wrong.

Think of it this way: little Donnie has a bag of lollies to share with his friends. He holds up the bag and says "who wants a lolly"?

Little Pedro says "Oh, I'd like a lolly"!

But little Donnie says "You just want to steal all the lollies for yourself" and runs away to his mummy saying "Pedro wants to take my lollies and will gang up with all his friends".

Little Pedro just stands there thinking, 'WTF just happened'?


"A few guys threw stones"... That's not an attack? Our law enforcement didn't shoot the people, they tear gassed them. What do you want them to do, give them flowers?

our entire response is absolutely ridiuclous.

How about you field a better solution?


My response is ridiculous?

Why you would think flowers would be appropriate to the situation really defeats me? Perhaps they should all spontaneously dance the Macarena, too? At least it would disturb the aim of the kids trying to throw stones.

Actually, if the guards just stood their ground, behind their shields, then the boys would eventually run out of stones and get tired. That way, no one has to give an inch.




top topics



 
47
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join