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.

 

Democrat Senator and CNN rush to blame Trump over New Zealand Massacre

page: 15
54
<< 12  13  14    16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 19 2019 @ 05:41 PM
link   
a reply to: Telos

Someone who was there disagrees.




posted on Mar, 19 2019 @ 05:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
Here's another stupid dumb-bell Democrat lying like a rug...

(it's Keith Ellison 😆 on CNN)

Keith Ellison: Evidence points to Trump being 'sympathetic' to white nationalist point of view



The people of Minnesota gave us Ellison and Omar. Too much cold = Brain freeze?



posted on Mar, 20 2019 @ 11:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Barcs


Kind of like how Trump could have passed the wall bill a year earlier with more funding or anything else he wanted during his first 2 years but barely did anything.



The President can pass bills? When did this change?

TheRedneck


LOL @ using semantics as an argument. You know exactly what I am talking about, but misrepresent it anyways.



posted on Mar, 20 2019 @ 11:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: HarbingerOfShadows
a reply to: Barcs

"Real" countries......

Never heard of the No Real Scotsman fallacy I see.


LOL! So because of the word "real" you think I used the no true scotsman fallacy?? Do you even know what that fallacy means? Clearly not, because I wasn't arguing anything like that. If you are going to follow me around and accuse me of fallacies, at least get them right.


edit on 3 20 19 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 21 2019 @ 03:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: HarbingerOfShadows
a reply to: Telos

Someone who was there disagrees.


Exactly. Tell that to chr0naut



posted on Mar, 21 2019 @ 08:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Barcs


You know exactly what I am talking about, but misrepresent it anyways.

Yes, I know. You are saying that the label "Republican" somehow changes good policies for bad policies and turns people evil when they wear it. I reject that nonsense.

The fact is that Trump tried to get the Republicans and Democrats in Congress to pass funding for the wall... he was promised funding for the wall. Congress broke that promise (as usual). So Congress (under Republican control for the most part) is to blame, not Trump. Trump cannot pass legislation; he can only suggest it and block it.

My post was intended to point that out; apparently it failed. The most probable reason would seem to be that you believe everyone is defined by the political party they checked the box for on their voter registration. That is a false belief.

TheRedneck



posted on Mar, 23 2019 @ 02:29 PM
link   
a reply to: Barcs

Sure.
Keep telling yourself that.
But you were referencing countries doing what you think they should as "real" countries.
That is no true scotsman fallacy.


Also, your proving my point from that other thread more I see.
edit on 23-3-2019 by HarbingerOfShadows because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 23 2019 @ 02:30 PM
link   
Yay more internet hickup fun.

This was a double post folks.
edit on 23-3-2019 by HarbingerOfShadows because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 23 2019 @ 02:30 PM
link   
a reply to: Telos

Can't tell a mind that thinks it already knows everything it needs to anything.
edit on 23-3-2019 by HarbingerOfShadows because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 23 2019 @ 03:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: HarbingerOfShadows
a reply to: Barcs

Sure.
Keep telling yourself that.
But you were referencing countries doing what you think they should as "real" countries.
That is no true scotsman fallacy.


Also, your proving my point from that other thread more I see.


www.logicallyfallacious.com...


Description: When a universal (“all”, “every”, etc.) claim is refuted, rather than conceding the point or meaningfully revising the claim, the claim is altered by going from universal to specific, and failing to give any objective criteria for the specificity.


My argument was not that the USA wasn't a country. I was saying that they are not being practical.

The word "real" can mean honest or simply relating to practical or everyday concerns or activities, so by changing what I meant by the word you are invoking the equivocation fallacy. Congrats!

edit on 3 23 19 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 23 2019 @ 07:21 PM
link   
a reply to: Barcs



Funny considering how fond you are for posting official sources you completely fail to post the relevant and completely contrary to your claims definition.


re·al1
/ˈrē(ə)l/Submit
adjective
1.
actually existing as a thing or occurring in fact; not imagined or supposed.
"Julius Caesar was a real person"
synonyms: actual, existent, nonfictional, nonfictitious, factual; More
2.
(of a substance or thing) not imitation or artificial; genuine.
"the earring was presumably real gold"
synonyms: genuine, authentic, bona fide, pukka; More
adverb
INFORMAL•NORTH AMERICAN
1.
really; very.
"my head hurts real bad"
synonyms: very, extremely, exceedingly, exceptionally, especially, tremendously, immensely, vastly, hugely;


As for the rest of your "I know you are but what am I?!" response.
I just have to wonder why your types are so fond of that particular theme.
Reveals the mindset more than anything else hilariously enough.



posted on Mar, 24 2019 @ 02:19 PM
link   
a reply to: HarbingerOfShadows

The smear campaign continues.

www.merriam-webster.com...


Definition of real

1a : having objective independent existence

b : not artificial, fraudulent, or illusory : GENUINE

also : being precisely what the name implies

c(1) : occurring or existing in actuality

(2) : of or relating to practical or everyday concerns or activities

(3) : existing as a physical entity and having properties that deviate from an ideal, law, or standard
..... many more etc etc etc



Synonyms & Antonyms for real
Synonyms: Adjective

authentic, bona fide, certifiable, certified, dinkum [Australian & New Zealand], echt, genuine, honest, pukka (also pucka), right, sure-enough, true



As for the rest of your "I know you are but what am I?!" response.
I just have to wonder why your types are so fond of that particular theme.
Reveals the mindset more than anything else hilariously enough.


I know you are but what am I? I used that argument??? You made a false accusation about me using a fallacy and tried to use a fallacy to justify it. I pointed out your double standard. Take the loss and move on. Next time don't jump to conclusions.


edit on 3 24 19 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 24 2019 @ 06:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Barcs


The smear campaign continues.


My someone thinks they're far more important than they are....

No, what is happening here is someone calling you on your bullcrap.
Welcome to how you treat others, regardless of their deserving it.
I know. I know.
Bullcrap you've decided isn't bullcrap at all.
And those "stupid" "idiots" deserve your righteous disdain...
You think you're quite righteous.
Like every other unquestioning self righteous crusader.
Too bad you're not at all honest in any context, even with yourself apparently.
Considering, case in point, you continue to try to find a out for your own comments by any means possible.
Even weak inconsistent semantic argument.
Hilariously enough after blasting someone else on the subject of semantics.


I know you are but what am I? I used that argument??? You made a false accusation about me using a fallacy and tried to use a fallacy to justify it. I pointed out your double standard. Take the loss and move on. Next time don't jump to conclusions.


Get thyself to a mirror, look deeply and ponder.
Maybe you notice your pre-occupation with "winning" in a debate is part of why you fail Young Skywalker.
No, you're not winning.
You're proving my point with every single one of your responses.
It's not about "winning" it never has been.

And yes, your type, you are in complete lock step with a certain subset of people.
Tactics, stated beliefs, self righteous assualts on dissenting opinions, overblown senses of self importance, and words completely like the afforementioned subset.

edit on 24-3-2019 by HarbingerOfShadows because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 25 2019 @ 12:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: HarbingerOfShadows
No, what is happening here is someone calling you on your bullcrap.
Welcome to how you treat others, regardless of their deserving it.
I know. I know.
Bullcrap you've decided isn't bullcrap at all.
And those "stupid" "idiots" deserve your righteous disdain...
You think you're quite righteous.
Like every other unquestioning self righteous crusader.
Too bad you're not at all honest in any context, even with yourself apparently.
Considering, case in point, you continue to try to find a out for your own comments by any means possible.
Even weak inconsistent semantic argument.
Hilariously enough after blasting someone else on the subject of semantics.


LMAO @ this whiny nonsense. I'm not self righteous at all. You made false accusations and I proved they were false. Now you are ranting because you got splattered. Like I said, take the loss and move on. Maybe you can try to catch me in some other fallacy in some other thread, but you completely failed here. You didn't even grasp my original argument and hastily jumped to conclusions thinking you could one-up me and tried to tell me what I MEANT when I USED a word. THAT is semantics and equivocation. Look it up. I never argued that this makes America not a country.


Get thyself to a mirror, look deeply and ponder.
Maybe you notice your pre-occupation with "winning" in a debate is part of why you fail Young Skywalker.
No, you're not winning.
You're proving my point with every single one of your responses.
It's not about "winning" it never has been.


You offered no refutation to anything I said. You are being extremely dishonest over what seems like a personal vendetta. I'm not sure what I ever did to you. You got upset because I dismissed lies that Cooperton has been telling on here for years.


And yes, your type, you are in complete lock step with a certain subset of people.
Tactics, stated beliefs, self righteous assualts on dissenting opinions, overblown senses of self importance, and words completely like the afforementioned subset.


I am a hard core logician. If you don't like that, then don't use illogical arguments. Pointing out logical flaws is what I do. I've made mistakes and owned up to them in the past. You are defending the wrong people and trying to smear my reputation over it. If you wish to disprove or refute me, you need an actual argument instead of dishonest accusations and personal attacks.


edit on 3 25 19 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 25 2019 @ 02:22 PM
link   
a reply to: Barcs

Funny how much this applies to much of that speel you spewed.
Just because you say it doesn't make it so.
Hate to tell you.

Oh and



you need an actual argument instead of dishonest accusations and personal attacks.


LoL!!!!!!!!
You honestly don't pay much attention to your own words do you?
Which also hilariously fits a vast section of your self righteous ego wanking session you call a post.
edit on 25-3-2019 by HarbingerOfShadows because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 26 2019 @ 11:23 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Two men who helped build CNN...and left when it became an Anti-America terrorist organization...briefly discuss how far the network has fallen.

Donald Trump Tweet - 2 minute video: twitter.com...



posted on Mar, 27 2019 @ 02:10 PM
link   
a reply to: HarbingerOfShadows

Dude, just stop. You are making yourself look worse and worse. Literally it's just false accusation after false accusation with you. Now I'm an extremist? Put the personal attacks away and stop the fake outrage. You got utterly demolished yet you still continue to fight tooth and nail for a lost cause. Grow up.


edit on 3 27 19 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 28 2019 @ 03:43 AM
link   
a reply to: Barcs

Eye roll.....



Literally it's just false accusation after false accusation with you


Then by all means quote what you believe is the person’s biggest false accusation.

I am guessing you will go off on another rant without providing an actual quote.



posted on Mar, 28 2019 @ 02:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Barcs

Eye roll.....



Literally it's just false accusation after false accusation with you


Then by all means quote what you believe is the person’s biggest false accusation.

I am guessing you will go off on another rant without providing an actual quote.


Eye roll....

Scroll up and read it. He accused me of using the No True Scotsman fallacy, and it turned out he was wrong and I clearly explained why. No argument or refutation was ever given, just personal attacks and denial after I broke it down. Go read the post. I'm not repeating my entire argument again, just for you, so you can ignore it like the last thread.


edit on 3 28 19 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 28 2019 @ 06:08 PM
link   
a reply to: Barcs
Eh. I'm bored so why not.

LMAO @ this whiny nonsense.


Not so much.
You're assuming my mental state in saying it.
You tend to assume alot I've noticed, more on that later.
News flash.
Emotional state, motivation and intent is hardly as easy to ascertain as you think it is.
The first because this is the internet and problems with interpretation and what is meant exist.
But it's all a grey area and always will be minus any sort of extrasensory ability.
I find it hilarious you internet self styled geniuses always seem to think that your perceived and largely nonexistent intelligence somehow makes you mind readers.


You made false accusations and I proved they were false.


Nope.
Hand-waiving and silly dodge using the holes in your statement does not proving make.
So sorry.


You got upset because I dismissed lies that Cooperton has been telling on here for years.


Who?
Oh yea that one guy I largely disagreed with on one thread except on the subject of you.
Yea.
Ok.
My comments in this thread about emotional state, motivation, and intent still apply.



Now you are ranting because you got splattered. Like I said, take the loss and move on.


*chuckles*
Again, just because you say it doesn't mean it's true kiddo.
Really need to figure out what true debate is actually for and how to do it..
It's not this schoolyard silliness you seem married to.
Just saying.


You offered no refutation to anything I said. You are being extremely dishonest over what seems like a personal vendetta. You got upset because I dismissed lies that Cooperton has been telling on here for years.


Quite stuck on this Cooperton guy/girl aren't we?


I'm not sure what I ever did to you.


Victims? Aren't we all?
Also, as I think I said before, get over yourself.


I am a hard core logician. If you don't like that, then don't use illogical arguments.


Says every internet armchair logician ever.
Usually while trying to worm out of being called on their bullcrap.
Like you are.

edit on 28-3-2019 by HarbingerOfShadows because: God is in the TV.



new topics

top topics



 
54
<< 12  13  14    16 >>

log in

join