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.

 

BBC Camera Man Attacked at Trump Rally UPDATED.

page: 12
21
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 13 2019 @ 04:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: narrator

originally posted by: MadLad

originally posted by: narrator

originally posted by: MadLad

originally posted by: narrator

originally posted by: 3n19m470

originally posted by: narrator

originally posted by: 3n19m470
a reply to: narrator




Could it be a liberal plant? Sure, of course it could. It could also be a Trump supporter. It's important to realize that it could be both. Some folks here on ATS (from both sides) refuse to do so. 



Dude, seriously, vat are you talking about??? I think pretty much every person here has acknowledged, directly or indirectly, by implication, that this could just be a Trump supporter.

I already went over this with OtherSideOfTheCoin... Go back and reread the posts, beginning with page one. The first person who mentioned the idea, merely asked a QUESTION... The next person said "this MAY be a plant". Another said we ought to wait for all the information to come in first.

Do you understand the meanings of words? Do you understand the difference between speculating and making an absolute statement like a Sith?

There is absolutely Nothing wrong with open speculation. You are pretending to be upset at people who "refuse" to accept that it could be either way...

But what it really looks like to me, personally, is that you are mad at the mere mention of the possibility that this could've been a plant.

Maybe even offended or hurt on a deep level.

Like it's almost as if you thought to yourself "Aha! We finally got a Trump supporter doing something wrong! On camera, At a rally, In a MAGA hat, we got em dead to rights this time!" and you were deeply offended at the prospect of someone taking away that small victory from you which you so desperately needed.

Just the mention of the mere POSSIBILITY that this may not be true was too much for you to handle...

Nobody is refusing to accept reality but you. Many of us have reiterated for clarity that, yes, it could have been a Trump supporter. I mean, DUH... who could be stupid enough to deny that? You are just applying undesirable traits to your perceived political opponents.

You Want to believe so badly that Trump supporters are that stupid... and that disconnect with reality is why you will continue to lose and be disappointed.


I responded to you on page 5, did you not see that?

First post of page 2, direct quote: "Obvious Democrat operative. DNC/MSM trick." So you are wrong, not everyone has. To quote you: "do you understand the meaning of words?"

That's "vat" I'm talking about. There are people on ATS that would rather believe that it was a plant than a Trump supporter.

Explain to me where you start to believe that I'm deeply hurt, or upset, about this situation. I'm not a Democrat, far from it. I'm also not a Republican, far from it. I hold no cards in this game, just calling it like I see it.

Where have I said that it was definitely not a Democrat plant? I specifically said it could be, in fact, you quoted me saying EXACTLY that.

What reality am I refusing to accept? I flat out said it could be a plant.

I truly don't understand your post to me, I think you may be mistaking me for someone else.


I said "pretty much every person".

You said you "find it disheartening that people on here...". People as in plural. Then you pull up one example? Get outta here with that garbage bro.


Ok, grammar police. Are you/they acknowledging that there's, at minimum, a 50/50 chance that it's a Trump supporter? If we're going to get into specifics, I want definitive numbers.

Now, what about everything else that was said that you conveniently skipped over?

Bro.



If you think a generalization means the entirety of the group, wouldn't you be guilty of a worse sort of generalization?


I don't think that. I think the exact opposite. A generalization means SOME members of a group, which is what I've been saying this entire time. It isn't the whole group.


Then you probably agree with most if not all of the posters here. I'm not aware of anyone who has said or believes plural leftist means all leftists. So there is no sense in attempting to police their speech and bring up examples of bad right-wing behavior.


What?

So, saying "leftists" doesn't mean "leftists"?

I'm not trying to police speech, I'm trying to comprehend what's being said, because it seems like there are a lot of hoops being jumped through in order to prove that someone who disagrees with you is wrong.


No, "leftists" doesn't always mean all leftists. I thought I made that point clear, and I'm not sure why you'd try to misrepresent my point. I'm just asking why you think a generalization means all.




posted on Feb, 13 2019 @ 04:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: LSU2018

originally posted by: narrator

originally posted by: 3n19m470

originally posted by: narrator

originally posted by: 3n19m470

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: Edumakated

So you will take it at face value when its a Liberal going bat-# crazy but when its one of your own you want to pretend it a fake.

I can understand being a little skeptical but there are members right now claiming that this guy was a plant there is zero evidence to support such a view.


Because it is CHARACTERISTIC of Leftists to, what was it Democrat Leader Maxine Waters said again? Push back, get in their faces, form a crowd, let them know they are not welcome, Anywhere!?

They go low, we kick em? Was that Corey Booker who said that?



And to your post below this one: We DO condemn him, no matter What his true beliefs are he harmed the movement!

Qanon and Trump and the White House Press Releases have condemned violence.

I'll hand it to you that Trump, during his campaign made a statement that he would pay for lawyer fees for people getting into a skirmish at his rallies. That was probably not right but it's an innuendo, much different than the direct orders given by Democrats who basically said "hunt them down". Remember the crowd outside Tuckers home? Where are the examples of this on the right?

This is not characteristic of the right, and that is what makes a logical unbiased thinker, think twice about this event. Whereas with the left... well, it would be near impossible to pull off that many staged hysteria events... so therefore it is easier for a logical unbiased thinker to accept. Of course, in all situations there could be missing information that we did not have at first, but we can't help but lean one way or the other at least a little, based on our past experiences and data pool we have to work with.

My past experiences and accumulated knowledge tells me this is right up their (the BBC, or some other Leftist) alley to stage something like this.

My past experience tells me that any Trump supporter would know this would only hurt Trump. There is a chance he may not be mentally stable, but since most people Are mentally stable... I have to wonder why he would do something like this. To intentionally hurt Trump and his support base comes to mind as one obvious option.

I guess there is a possibility that he really thought Trump was telling him to do this... But he would have to be a mentally unwell person. We can't always watch our words just because some mental case might take our words in a way we did not intend.

You could silence anyone with that threat. "Oh, so you're saying guns are bad and gun owners are insensitive to the deaths of children? Oh ok, I guess that means you're telling people to target gun owners with all manner of harassment and violence until they give in. It's only matter of time before some poor whacked out person hurts somebody because of these irresponsible declarations."

"Oh, you're saying soda is bad for you and everywhere that sella soda doesnt care if we live or die or contract diabetes? Oh, ok, I guess that means..."

So it's a little rediculous to say the media can attack Trump day in day out for 3 years, celebrities showing bloodied Trump heads held up triumphantly with a psychotic expression and making fun of his penis and everything else under the sun, but...hes inciting violence by calling them fake news and the enemy of the people.

Do you forget how the media collaborated with the CIA to get us into Iraq 1 and 2 just for starters??



www.splcenter.org...

2/3 of US terrorism is carried out by "right wing extremists". Can that be considered "characteristic" of right wing people?

Shootings, mailed pipe bombs, etc. Characteristics of the right wing?


I believe I said something to the effect of "based on my past experiences and accumulated knowledge". I haven't witnessed or experienced this. Have you?

I don't think a rare event like terrorism can be used like you are trying to use it... Hundreds or Thousands of terror attacks by Muslims happen every year, but I wouldn't go as far as to say that it is characteristic of Muslims.

I'm quite confident Billions of them dont terrorize anyone, other than their own families and communities of course, as directed by Allah. Honor killings and genital mutilation and female persecution and such.


It was said that it's characteristic of Democrats to act that way. I was pointing out that I could use the same tactic on the right wing, by using that stat to show that it could be construed to be characteristic of the right.

You got my entire point. It isn't characteristic of Democrats to do that, because only .0001% of them act like that. Just like only .0001% of Republicans act negatively as well.

It's important to show that both sides do bad things.


C'mon man. We saw hundreds of college kids complaining about being traumatized over Trump's name in chalk on their school's sidewalks. We watched 95% of Hollywood almost rip their hair out in anger over Trump's victory. We watched march after march and saw leftist actor after leftist actress talk about violence towards Trump. A huge portion of the liberals that love the spotlight are the ones raining down the negativity perspective to all.


Again, both sides are guilty. A lot of conservatives are going bonkers and seem downright scared about AOC, tons of people have said that Hillary should be in prison (and worse), caricatures of Obama were hanged by nooses off of trees.

Both sides are culpable.



posted on Feb, 13 2019 @ 04:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: MadLad

originally posted by: GenerationGap
If Trump is responsible for physical attacks on media personnel then media personnel are responsible for attacks on teens wearing MAGA hats.

That axe swings both ways if that's the logic we are going to use.


Polls show that voters are coming to their senses. Though the media consistently blames Trump for the division, voters are starting to see that it is the media dividing the country.

morningconsult.com...


It makes sense for the known problem to blame the little guy. They DO have all the power to spread the fake propaganda.



posted on Feb, 13 2019 @ 04:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: LSU2018

originally posted by: 3n19m470

originally posted by: WilsonWilson
Wow people will say anything to excuse assault, if the person who did it shares tha same politics.scary.


Hey pal I don't mean to get on your case, but, could you maybe clarify your post?

I don't know that I've seen anyone excusing the assault.

I said it once but I'll repeat it here: No matter what the man's true political leanings are, he has harmed the movement and harmed Trump. There's no excuse for that.


On top of that, it wasn't even assault. I don't know how any of these wankers made it past the 90's. I made some of my best friends after we had a fist fight and beat each others asses.


HAHA exactly.

It's the cry-bully movememnt. Courtesy of the non-spankimg/parenting trophy generation. Probably intentionally pushed through public schools so poiliticians can rip us off more without getting a beat-down. ...thought up in some paranoid pentagon think tank.

Kinda like the weird anti-semetism power grab.



posted on Feb, 13 2019 @ 04:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: tinner07
a reply to: Krakatoa




Your use of the adjective "silly" nullifies your statement IMO. Since, you obviously think that anyone that supports the president is "silly" and therefore worth your scorn. Why are you putting yourself above others? Is it a deep seeded need to feel superior or just being a dick about it?


Just out of curiosity, do you feel the same or respond in like to every trump supporter here that constantly ridicules democrats??? Or is it only you guys that are allowed to that without "nullifying" your /their statement?

In your opinion yes YOUR OPINION, the majority of threads and statements made on this website are null and void lol...


I know you weren't asking me, but I'm just gonna reply as if you were. So, don't take this personal cause we never spoke... your post just inspired me is all. It's a good thing. Okay, here's me replying:

Actually, yes.

I myself have failed countless times at this important part of etiquette. Whether the logic of your point is nullified, is irrelevant, because the entirety of your message is "nullified" as it concerns the other party, since, psychologically, it can be very difficult for most people to take a constructive criticism to heart when it is sprinkled with such adjectives.

I mean, the fact is, we are all silly. Each and every one of us.

But, that's not the picture one paints when they call another person silly. The impression given is that all is right with the world, or at least the immediate environment, but they are the only person or thing behaving in an odd manner.

Of course, a part of me wants to say "Well so what? People are too damn sensitive..." and this may be true, especially in the case of such a minor insult as "silly", but it does not change the fact that you essentially shot down your own carrier pigeon immediately after sending it on its mission to deliver your message, because people DO become sensitive when another person is attacking their ability to think logically, understand words (sorry narrator that was truly wrong of me to attack your ability to understand words in such an immature way), parenting is another sensitive area, and basically just attacking their ability to function as a normal person in society...

To be clear, "silly" is not the most extreme example and I am more referring to the act in general of adding these unnecessary additions to our message.

Hardly anyone is going to have the grasp over their own ego to respond with something like, "You're right I'll try to change from now on" when someone is attacking their very character, what makes you "you". Cause even if they are right, they're being a jerk about it and that is not right.

Not only is it an offense to the person targeted, but as I already stated, the person being a jerk is just hurting their own cause. So it would be incorrect anyway to say "You're right, I'll try to change from now on" because the person was not right to behave that way and you should not encourage them to continue.

I suppose you Could say "Well, I see your point, but there was no need to be a jerk about it, it distracts from your otherwise valid point."

So, yeah, I do think we could all be 999X more effective at transmitting our ideas to other humans if we could do so in a way that they are more likely to take to heart and truly consider, rather than repeatedly using proven failures as communication techniques.



posted on Feb, 13 2019 @ 04:34 PM
link   
So apparently the shover had a price tag still on his hat - which makes him being a plant much more likely




posted on Feb, 13 2019 @ 04:37 PM
link   
a reply to: proximo

Must be Minnie Pearl's nephew 😃

Only a Democrat would forget to cut off the tags 🤣

bwuk bwuk bwuk bwuk 🐔
edit on Feb-13-2019 by xuenchen because: banana democrats😋



posted on Feb, 13 2019 @ 04:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: MadLad

originally posted by: narrator

originally posted by: MadLad

originally posted by: narrator

originally posted by: MadLad

originally posted by: narrator

originally posted by: 3n19m470

originally posted by: narrator

originally posted by: 3n19m470
a reply to: narrator




Could it be a liberal plant? Sure, of course it could. It could also be a Trump supporter. It's important to realize that it could be both. Some folks here on ATS (from both sides) refuse to do so. 



Dude, seriously, vat are you talking about??? I think pretty much every person here has acknowledged, directly or indirectly, by implication, that this could just be a Trump supporter.

I already went over this with OtherSideOfTheCoin... Go back and reread the posts, beginning with page one. The first person who mentioned the idea, merely asked a QUESTION... The next person said "this MAY be a plant". Another said we ought to wait for all the information to come in first.

Do you understand the meanings of words? Do you understand the difference between speculating and making an absolute statement like a Sith?

There is absolutely Nothing wrong with open speculation. You are pretending to be upset at people who "refuse" to accept that it could be either way...

But what it really looks like to me, personally, is that you are mad at the mere mention of the possibility that this could've been a plant.

Maybe even offended or hurt on a deep level.

Like it's almost as if you thought to yourself "Aha! We finally got a Trump supporter doing something wrong! On camera, At a rally, In a MAGA hat, we got em dead to rights this time!" and you were deeply offended at the prospect of someone taking away that small victory from you which you so desperately needed.

Just the mention of the mere POSSIBILITY that this may not be true was too much for you to handle...

Nobody is refusing to accept reality but you. Many of us have reiterated for clarity that, yes, it could have been a Trump supporter. I mean, DUH... who could be stupid enough to deny that? You are just applying undesirable traits to your perceived political opponents.

You Want to believe so badly that Trump supporters are that stupid... and that disconnect with reality is why you will continue to lose and be disappointed.


I responded to you on page 5, did you not see that?

First post of page 2, direct quote: "Obvious Democrat operative. DNC/MSM trick." So you are wrong, not everyone has. To quote you: "do you understand the meaning of words?"

That's "vat" I'm talking about. There are people on ATS that would rather believe that it was a plant than a Trump supporter.

Explain to me where you start to believe that I'm deeply hurt, or upset, about this situation. I'm not a Democrat, far from it. I'm also not a Republican, far from it. I hold no cards in this game, just calling it like I see it.

Where have I said that it was definitely not a Democrat plant? I specifically said it could be, in fact, you quoted me saying EXACTLY that.

What reality am I refusing to accept? I flat out said it could be a plant.

I truly don't understand your post to me, I think you may be mistaking me for someone else.


I said "pretty much every person".

You said you "find it disheartening that people on here...". People as in plural. Then you pull up one example? Get outta here with that garbage bro.


Ok, grammar police. Are you/they acknowledging that there's, at minimum, a 50/50 chance that it's a Trump supporter? If we're going to get into specifics, I want definitive numbers.

Now, what about everything else that was said that you conveniently skipped over?

Bro.



If you think a generalization means the entirety of the group, wouldn't you be guilty of a worse sort of generalization?


I don't think that. I think the exact opposite. A generalization means SOME members of a group, which is what I've been saying this entire time. It isn't the whole group.


Then you probably agree with most if not all of the posters here. I'm not aware of anyone who has said or believes plural leftist means all leftists. So there is no sense in attempting to police their speech and bring up examples of bad right-wing behavior.


What?

So, saying "leftists" doesn't mean "leftists"?

I'm not trying to police speech, I'm trying to comprehend what's being said, because it seems like there are a lot of hoops being jumped through in order to prove that someone who disagrees with you is wrong.


No, "leftists" doesn't always mean all leftists. I thought I made that point clear, and I'm not sure why you'd try to misrepresent my point. I'm just asking why you think a generalization means all.


I'm honestly not trying to misrepresent you, I truly just didn't understand what you meant. I apologize if you took it that way.

In my defense, there was no indication of that being a generalization. Why wasn't "some leftists" used instead of "leftists"?

I'm not trying to come down on how something is written, I'm just genuinely saying that I feel like it was perfectly reasonable to think that "leftists" meant what it sounds like, rather than what was insinuated without text to say otherwise.

Not everyone on this board is a native speaker, and while I am, I clearly didn't understand what was meant either. Sometimes it helps to be as clear as possible, rather than leaving things up to interpretation.



posted on Feb, 13 2019 @ 04:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: 3n19m470

originally posted by: tinner07
a reply to: Krakatoa




Your use of the adjective "silly" nullifies your statement IMO. Since, you obviously think that anyone that supports the president is "silly" and therefore worth your scorn. Why are you putting yourself above others? Is it a deep seeded need to feel superior or just being a dick about it?


Just out of curiosity, do you feel the same or respond in like to every trump supporter here that constantly ridicules democrats??? Or is it only you guys that are allowed to that without "nullifying" your /their statement?

In your opinion yes YOUR OPINION, the majority of threads and statements made on this website are null and void lol...



(sorry narrator



No worries! I apologize as well, I could've been more level-headed too, everyone gets heated when their viewpoints are being challenged.

No harm done.


edit on 13-2-2019 by narrator because: typo



posted on Feb, 13 2019 @ 04:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: narrator

originally posted by: MadLad

originally posted by: narrator

originally posted by: MadLad

originally posted by: narrator

originally posted by: MadLad

originally posted by: narrator

originally posted by: 3n19m470

originally posted by: narrator

originally posted by: 3n19m470
a reply to: narrator




Could it be a liberal plant? Sure, of course it could. It could also be a Trump supporter. It's important to realize that it could be both. Some folks here on ATS (from both sides) refuse to do so. 



Dude, seriously, vat are you talking about??? I think pretty much every person here has acknowledged, directly or indirectly, by implication, that this could just be a Trump supporter.

I already went over this with OtherSideOfTheCoin... Go back and reread the posts, beginning with page one. The first person who mentioned the idea, merely asked a QUESTION... The next person said "this MAY be a plant". Another said we ought to wait for all the information to come in first.

Do you understand the meanings of words? Do you understand the difference between speculating and making an absolute statement like a Sith?

There is absolutely Nothing wrong with open speculation. You are pretending to be upset at people who "refuse" to accept that it could be either way...

But what it really looks like to me, personally, is that you are mad at the mere mention of the possibility that this could've been a plant.

Maybe even offended or hurt on a deep level.

Like it's almost as if you thought to yourself "Aha! We finally got a Trump supporter doing something wrong! On camera, At a rally, In a MAGA hat, we got em dead to rights this time!" and you were deeply offended at the prospect of someone taking away that small victory from you which you so desperately needed.

Just the mention of the mere POSSIBILITY that this may not be true was too much for you to handle...

Nobody is refusing to accept reality but you. Many of us have reiterated for clarity that, yes, it could have been a Trump supporter. I mean, DUH... who could be stupid enough to deny that? You are just applying undesirable traits to your perceived political opponents.

You Want to believe so badly that Trump supporters are that stupid... and that disconnect with reality is why you will continue to lose and be disappointed.


I responded to you on page 5, did you not see that?

First post of page 2, direct quote: "Obvious Democrat operative. DNC/MSM trick." So you are wrong, not everyone has. To quote you: "do you understand the meaning of words?"

That's "vat" I'm talking about. There are people on ATS that would rather believe that it was a plant than a Trump supporter.

Explain to me where you start to believe that I'm deeply hurt, or upset, about this situation. I'm not a Democrat, far from it. I'm also not a Republican, far from it. I hold no cards in this game, just calling it like I see it.

Where have I said that it was definitely not a Democrat plant? I specifically said it could be, in fact, you quoted me saying EXACTLY that.

What reality am I refusing to accept? I flat out said it could be a plant.

I truly don't understand your post to me, I think you may be mistaking me for someone else.


I said "pretty much every person".

You said you "find it disheartening that people on here...". People as in plural. Then you pull up one example? Get outta here with that garbage bro.


Ok, grammar police. Are you/they acknowledging that there's, at minimum, a 50/50 chance that it's a Trump supporter? If we're going to get into specifics, I want definitive numbers.

Now, what about everything else that was said that you conveniently skipped over?

Bro.



If you think a generalization means the entirety of the group, wouldn't you be guilty of a worse sort of generalization?


I don't think that. I think the exact opposite. A generalization means SOME members of a group, which is what I've been saying this entire time. It isn't the whole group.


Then you probably agree with most if not all of the posters here. I'm not aware of anyone who has said or believes plural leftist means all leftists. So there is no sense in attempting to police their speech and bring up examples of bad right-wing behavior.


What?

So, saying "leftists" doesn't mean "leftists"?

I'm not trying to police speech, I'm trying to comprehend what's being said, because it seems like there are a lot of hoops being jumped through in order to prove that someone who disagrees with you is wrong.


No, "leftists" doesn't always mean all leftists. I thought I made that point clear, and I'm not sure why you'd try to misrepresent my point. I'm just asking why you think a generalization means all.


I'm honestly not trying to misrepresent you, I truly just didn't understand what you meant. I apologize if you took it that way.

In my defense, there was no indication of that being a generalization. Why wasn't "some leftists" used instead of "leftists"?

I'm not trying to come down on how something is written, I'm just genuinely saying that I feel like it was perfectly reasonable to think that "leftists" meant what it sounds like, rather than what was insinuated without text to say otherwise.

Not everyone on this board is a native speaker, and while I am, I clearly didn't understand what was meant either. Sometimes it helps to be as clear as possible, rather than leaving things up to interpretation.


That's totally fair. I too don't know whether someone meant leftists plural or all leftists. But I think its quicker and subtracts less from the topic to just ask them instead of assuming the worst and making a case of it.



posted on Feb, 13 2019 @ 04:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: 3n19m470

originally posted by: jimmyx

originally posted by: Krakatoa
Is there a full length video that shows his actions prior to the incident?

We should wait for the full story to emerge, and not get reactionary out of the gate. After all, the media and those with an agenda would never tailor a clip to support their biased narrative, right?



the full story??.....c'mon, this type of demonization of the "media" has been common in all types of dictatorial governments for along time.....political history books give many examples of this....the whole idea is to get the populace to ONLY AGREE with what the dictator thinks is right...regardless of truth or reasoning skills


So... you are against the concept of gathering all the information before making a judgement? And are in support of knee jerk reactions and automatically believing what you're told with no questions asked?

Because dictators in the past have attacked the media, that means the media cannot be criticized or else people might think we like dictators?

Damn you caught us. We love dictators and hate freedom...


when the POTUS says publicly, hundreds of times year after year, that the media is the "enemy of the people"......and there is no pushback from the right?.....yeah, trump voters will believe they are "the enemy", and need to be disbelieved at the least, and/or physically harmed at the extreme.....trump has lied, easily proven by matching his own broadcasted words disputing obvious facts....

and as far as having all the information before making a judgment...if I went to the window of my house one morning and saw snow on the ground outside, it's safe to assume that it came from the sky, and that it wasn't hauled in by truck overnight and dumped in my neighborhood...I didn't have to be outside at the time the snow was actually falling, to correctly guess that the sky is where it came from....
edit on 13-2-2019 by jimmyx because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 13 2019 @ 05:00 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

It was a last minute thing obviously. Without the MAGA hat it wouldn't have been newsworthy.




posted on Feb, 13 2019 @ 05:03 PM
link   
originally posted by: narrator



Again, both sides are guilty. A lot of conservatives are going bonkers and seem downright scared about AOC, tons of people have said that Hillary should be in prison (and worse), caricatures of Obama were hanged by nooses off of trees.

Both sides are culpable.


Both culpable. Both capable. Both flawed. The left has just been much much... (worse? Nah, I guess emboldened would be a good or better word) more emboldened for the last 10 years or so.

The right is capable of the same. But the political climate has not led this to occur. The political climate has led the Left to accuse the majority of the Right, time and time again, of being evil nazi racists. See, when you convince these people over here that those people over there are evil hate filled nazis, and you have their Leaders telling them to form a crowd and send the message that Republicans, conservatives, Trump supporters are not welcome anymore Anywhere... they feel emboldened and they act out.

When you tell people that Trump is gonna sell America to the Russians, hes a traitor, a Russian double agent, and hes gonna start WW3, they tend to panic and act a little "looney".

When you tell people they Must resist in order to save America, and have them believing their freedom and way of life are at stake, they start to get scared and when people act out of fear they do some crazy things.

I don't even remember anything about Obama caricatures hung from trees, but I believe you as I believe you have nothing to gain from lying, but, I hope you aren't saying the right treated Obama and Hillary just as bad as the Left has treated Trump...

You're not saying that, are you? Surely you can see Trump is the most hated man to have ever lived. Even in Hitlers time there were a lot less people living on the planet so I think with the ability for information to travel plus the higher global population, Trump is quite possibly the most hated man to have ever lived.

The extremes and consistency are pushed far beyond any levels Obama or Hillary experienced. And it gets worse when you take the calibre of the positions of the people doing some of the most extreme hating. People who are supposed to know better, joking around about killing Trump and harming his family. Not just random nutjobs in Timbuktu. Pillars of community. Celebrities who kids look up to. Politicians in the highest positions in the land. Intelligence officials with access to some of our most guarded, sensitive information, News Anchors across the board. You name it. This attack, still ongoing, this resistance, this hostility, to a President, is unprecedented in American politics. Period.



posted on Feb, 13 2019 @ 05:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: jimmyx

originally posted by: 3n19m470

originally posted by: jimmyx

originally posted by: Krakatoa
Is there a full length video that shows his actions prior to the incident?

We should wait for the full story to emerge, and not get reactionary out of the gate. After all, the media and those with an agenda would never tailor a clip to support their biased narrative, right?



the full story??.....c'mon, this type of demonization of the "media" has been common in all types of dictatorial governments for along time.....political history books give many examples of this....the whole idea is to get the populace to ONLY AGREE with what the dictator thinks is right...regardless of truth or reasoning skills


So... you are against the concept of gathering all the information before making a judgement? And are in support of knee jerk reactions and automatically believing what you're told with no questions asked?

Because dictators in the past have attacked the media, that means the media cannot be criticized or else people might think we like dictators?

Damn you caught us. We love dictators and hate freedom...


when the POTUS says publicly, hundreds of times year after year, that the media is the "enemy of the people"......and there is no pushback from the right?.....yeah, trump voters will believe they are "the enemy", and need to be disbelieved at the least, and/or physically harmed at the extreme.....trump has lied, easily proven by matching his own broadcasted words disputing obvious facts....

and as far as having all the information before making a judgment...if I went to the window of my house one morning and saw snow on the ground outside, it's safe to assume that it came from the sky, and that it wasn't hauled in by truck overnight and dumped in my neighborhood...I didn't have to be outside at the time the snow was actually falling, to correctly guess that the sky is where it came from....


Unless of course your political rivals told and encouraged by leaders of that group to put snow over wherever someone that follows or agrees with you. Then, it becomes more plausible that it was left there by someone rather than fallen from the sky. Seems you conveniently left out that tidbit of context from the weak analogy.

Why is that?



posted on Feb, 13 2019 @ 05:10 PM
link   
Depending on the force of the "shove", there might have been minor bruising.

And that can hurts for minutes afterwards.

MINUTES!

Feelings might have been damaged also. We're talking "hurt" feelings.


I see a winning lawsuit personally.

And obviously grounds for impeachment.



posted on Feb, 13 2019 @ 05:11 PM
link   
a reply to: proximo

Just as I suspected, it was a price tag after all.

Assuming my other suspicion is also correct... It seems his seething hatred of Trump wouldnt allow him to remove the tag, he had to make sure he would be able to return the hat afterwards.

It would almost literally be blasphemy for him to actually give money towards a MAGA hat. He probably was concerned the money might go to Trump or to a conservative cause like helping veterans with PTSD.



posted on Feb, 13 2019 @ 05:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: 3n19m470
originally posted by: narrator



Again, both sides are guilty. A lot of conservatives are going bonkers and seem downright scared about AOC, tons of people have said that Hillary should be in prison (and worse), caricatures of Obama were hanged by nooses off of trees.

Both sides are culpable.


Both culpable. Both capable. Both flawed. The left has just been much much... (worse? Nah, I guess emboldened would be a good or better word) more emboldened for the last 10 years or so.

The right is capable of the same. But the political climate has not led this to occur. The political climate has led the Left to accuse the majority of the Right, time and time again, of being evil nazi racists. See, when you convince these people over here that those people over there are evil hate filled nazis, and you have their Leaders telling them to form a crowd and send the message that Republicans, conservatives, Trump supporters are not welcome anymore Anywhere... they feel emboldened and they act out.

When you tell people that Trump is gonna sell America to the Russians, hes a traitor, a Russian double agent, and hes gonna start WW3, they tend to panic and act a little "looney".

When you tell people they Must resist in order to save America, and have them believing their freedom and way of life are at stake, they start to get scared and when people act out of fear they do some crazy things.

I don't even remember anything about Obama caricatures hung from trees, but I believe you as I believe you have nothing to gain from lying, but, I hope you aren't saying the right treated Obama and Hillary just as bad as the Left has treated Trump...

You're not saying that, are you? Surely you can see Trump is the most hated man to have ever lived. Even in Hitlers time there were a lot less people living on the planet so I think with the ability for information to travel plus the higher global population, Trump is quite possibly the most hated man to have ever lived.

The extremes and consistency are pushed far beyond any levels Obama or Hillary experienced. And it gets worse when you take the calibre of the positions of the people doing some of the most extreme hating. People who are supposed to know better, joking around about killing Trump and harming his family. Not just random nutjobs in Timbuktu. Pillars of community. Celebrities who kids look up to. Politicians in the highest positions in the land. Intelligence officials with access to some of our most guarded, sensitive information, News Anchors across the board. You name it. This attack, still ongoing, this resistance, this hostility, to a President, is unprecedented in American politics. Period.


So, what of the killings/shootings/bombings perpetrated by those on the right? Those pale in comparison to leftists, what, being mean and lying to people?

I'm in no way saying the left is innocent. I just think both sides go about expressing their crazy in very different ways.

As for the Obama effigies, I know you believe me, but I'll leave this here in case you want to research:
abcnews.go.com...
fox4kc.com...
thehill.com...
www.telegraph.co.uk...

Hillary treated as bad...no way. Obama? I could make the argument that he was treated at least as badly. I mean, the guy spent years of his presidency having to listen to people say that he was a (insert racist slur) Kenyan Muslim who wasn't born in America. His family, his children, had to listen all of that as well. One of the most vocal of those people: Trump himself.
Obama bin Laden jokes were everywhere. Trump has been treated poorly, agreed. But making fun of a guy's spray tan is a little different than calling someone every racist slur in the world.
Kathy Griffin cut his head off...Several people hanged Obama from trees and burnt effigies of him.

The parallels are startling. Really paints the picture that Rs and Ds really are just two sides of the exact same coin.

So while I'll agree that what Trump is dealing with is bad, I can't agree that it's worse.

And I definitely disagree that he's the most hated man who has ever lived.



posted on Feb, 13 2019 @ 05:30 PM
link   
a reply to: proximo

Is that not just how the cool kids be wearing them these days?



posted on Feb, 13 2019 @ 05:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: blueman12

Trump is able to convince his followers that any news organization that doesn't support him is fake news.


And this is fake news too. Wouldn't be the first time they had to remove a democrat from a Trump rally for causing a ruckus.



posted on Feb, 13 2019 @ 05:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: jimmyx

originally posted by: 3n19m470

originally posted by: jimmyx

originally posted by: Krakatoa
Is there a full length video that shows his actions prior to the incident?

We should wait for the full story to emerge, and not get reactionary out of the gate. After all, the media and those with an agenda would never tailor a clip to support their biased narrative, right?



the full story??.....c'mon, this type of demonization of the "media" has been common in all types of dictatorial governments for along time.....political history books give many examples of this....the whole idea is to get the populace to ONLY AGREE with what the dictator thinks is right...regardless of truth or reasoning skills


So... you are against the concept of gathering all the information before making a judgement? And are in support of knee jerk reactions and automatically believing what you're told with no questions asked?

Because dictators in the past have attacked the media, that means the media cannot be criticized or else people might think we like dictators?

Damn you caught us. We love dictators and hate freedom...


when the POTUS says publicly, hundreds of times year after year, that the media is the "enemy of the people"......and there is no pushback from the right?.....yeah, trump voters will believe they are "the enemy", and need to be disbelieved at the least, and/or physically harmed at the extreme.....trump has lied, easily proven by matching his own broadcasted words disputing obvious facts....

and as far as having all the information before making a judgment...if I went to the window of my house one morning and saw snow on the ground outside, it's safe to assume that it came from the sky, and that it wasn't hauled in by truck overnight and dumped in my neighborhood...I didn't have to be outside at the time the snow was actually falling, to correctly guess that the sky is where it came from....


What the WHAT???

If Trump says the media is the enemy, then Trump supporters will believe they need to be physically harmed, even though Trump, the White House press officer, and Qanon have all ORDERED that no violence be done? Really?


And meanwhile, the other side, the Left, HAS literally ORDERED their people to form crowds, push back, kick em when they're down, etc etc etc... but you find it hard to believe this could be faked by these same instigators and it's as obvious as snow on the ground that it's just a Trump supporter acting out?

Dude, your on the side that LITERARALLY calls for violence. When you want to try to make us look bad, you have to find hints of innuendos that Could Potentially lead Someone to Think that Maybe they should be violent.... You gotta stretch waaaaay out there just to pluck a raisin sized morsel. We on the other hand have multiple examples of Democrat leaders literally calling for violence AND TONS of other insanity. Thats the side you're on.

And you literally just ridiculed the concept of gathering information before making a judgement. Literally every respected person throughout history would recommend that you not be taken seriously. Your basically just a grouchy old man who doesn't make sense but dont care since your goal is just to cause aggravation...







 
21
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join