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.

 

Violence and Right-Wing politics.

page: 5
12
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 6 2019 @ 11:16 AM
link   
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Wel by that logic you can be worried about illegal immigration and not be right wing.

Very convenient for you to ignore the climate rhetoric which is coming almost exclusively from the left, but focus on the immigrant rhetoric which comes mostly from the right




posted on Aug, 6 2019 @ 11:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Edumakated

So you're defending this guy too?


What you talking about, Willis?

I simply pointed out that it is stretch to call this guy right wing. The media jumped on his dislike of illegal immigration to make the claim he is a right wing lunatic to fit their narrative. However, they don't do the same thing when he also supported five or six other positions that are clearly left wing.

If you are going to claim that because he was against illegal immigration that makes the shooter a right wing nut job, then how in the same breath do you then ignore the five or six other left wing positions and not call him a left wing nut job?

1 right wing position - he is a right wing terrorist.

5 or 6 left wing positions - well, he is apolitical and just a crazy guy.

I don't know what kind of alternate reality some of you live in...



posted on Aug, 6 2019 @ 11:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: ketsuko

I Am only asking the questions, furthering the conversation, am not making an accusation.


Tell young men often enough that they're sh!t and how long will it take before they believe you and start getting angry? Then take one who was socially awkward and from a bad family situation to begin with and what do you think is prone to happen?

Now add in social media where he can finally find people who are also angry and start to find focus and connection ... if he already feels it's all hopeless because he's sh!t because all the messages being sent his way are that it's all over, the world is ending, his kind are crap and don't matter, etc., what do you think might happen?



posted on Aug, 6 2019 @ 11:21 AM
link   
a reply to: Edumakated

Its not so much that he was against immigration its that he was a advocate of the Christ-Church manifesto, he believed in a white genocide and a Hispanic invasion and that violence was part of the solution that is a far-right ideological motivation for his attacks.

Him being concerned about the environment doesn't really change that.



posted on Aug, 6 2019 @ 11:22 AM
link   
a reply to: LSU2018

Yeah I am.

It was not political.

YOU PAY ATTENTION.

I dont know what the point of making this political when it wasn't is.

Why does this have to be political?

It sounds more like a domentic dispute to me. He shot his sister and her boyfriend. Were they republicans?

Dayton is a big anti fascist city and you would think that this guy would have had some association with these groups that were right there. But there is no record or paper or cyber trail that indicate that.



posted on Aug, 6 2019 @ 11:23 AM
link   
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin
See how long this goes on.
July 9, 2014


1. Obama urges approval of $3.7 billion plan to handle child-immigration crisis Senate Democrats vowed to move quickly on passing a $3.7 billion package President Obama proposed to confront a wave of thousands of children illegally pouring across the Southwest border. President Obama urged Congress to approve the spending, which would pay for caring for the children but also swiftly deporting them.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said he aimed to finish a bill by Congress's August recess, but many Republicans withheld support due to what they called Obama's failure to secure the border. [The Hill, The New York Times]

theweek.com...



posted on Aug, 6 2019 @ 11:26 AM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

reductio ad absurdum



posted on Aug, 6 2019 @ 11:29 AM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

"I don't know what the point of making this political when it wasn't is."

Same as you trying to make it not politcal when it is.... you have invested hours this morning..... ask for a raise.


edit on R302019-08-06T11:30:00-05:00k308Vam by RickinVa because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 6 2019 @ 11:32 AM
link   
The killer cites the policies of Democrats as the motivating political factors, the treatment of the environment, automation, and unchecked immigration as the economic reasons, and the New Zealand Christchurch killer as his inspiration.



posted on Aug, 6 2019 @ 11:33 AM
link   
a reply to: knowledgehunter0986

Why do you hate law enforcement?



posted on Aug, 6 2019 @ 11:34 AM
link   
a reply to: RickinVa

Careful pointing out that posters vested interest in shilling. It may get your post removed and a warning. I’ll probably be banned after this comment.



posted on Aug, 6 2019 @ 11:36 AM
link   
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Ignore it and pick out a corresponding fault on the other side.

The old, 'I know you are but what am I" play ground chant.



posted on Aug, 6 2019 @ 11:36 AM
link   
There are three problems with your analysis.

1) You are unilaterally deciding what are and what are not "more extreme views" while giving no explanation as to the criteria you are using to make that distinction.

For example in your unexplained opinion "opposeing immigration" is an acceptable position to have; however "claiming that your political opostion want open borders" is not acceptable.

Why? Why is one acceptable and the other is not? What makes the second extreme and the first is not extreme?

I could just as easily unilaterally proclaim that "opposeing immigration" is an extreme view point and anyone who holds it is prompting or seeding or laying cover for the violence comited by any other person who might also hold that view point.

Even worse I could unilaterally proclaim that anyone who DOES NOT agree with open borders is holding an extreme viewpoint... and now according to your argument anyone who does not agree with open borders (you I assume) are now tide at the hip with the El-paso shooter who also does not agree with open borders.

You can play this game all day; finding creative ways to associate your political opostion with those people who commit violence as a means to dismiss your political opostion with out ever having to listen to their view point.

The Democrats seem to have an affinity to the color blue; you know who else has an affinity to the color blue? Crip gang members, and they commit violence. Anyone who promotes the color blue (the Democrats) must understand how they are promoting and laying cover for the violence comited by the Crips.... a silly argument I know; but it is in line with the argument you are trying to make.

2) You are arguing that those who have more liberal points of view must be taken more literally and be given the benefit of the doubt when they argue for their points of view but do not extend that same courtesy toward the more conservative side of the spectrum.

We are not supposed to believe Democrats want "open borders" when they champion policies such as sanctuary cites or drives licences for illegal immigrants. We are supposed to take their arguments at face value; they only want sanctuary cities so that law enforcement in those cities can have better community relations and drives licences for all is all about accountability.

We are not supposed to believe Democrats want to "grab guns" and strip us of our constitutional rights because they want tough gun restrictions; they only want tough gun restrictions to keep people safe.

All well and good; And I would agree.

But Republicans who want tough board control don't want it for safety reasons .... they just "oppose immigration" (your words) ... they don't just oppose illegal immigration, according to the words in your OP they oppose all immigration. They, according to you, also think their is a white genocide occurring.

I agree with you that people on the right need to do a better job in accepting the arguments being made by their political opposition at their face value. But the left equally needs to learn that lesson.


And 3) and the most problematic part of your argument.

Let us assume, for the sake of argument, that I am completely wrong with my last two points. That you do have a note worthy way of determining extreme view points and that Republicans are dispretionatly holding them.

That does not in anyway explain the next leap you make; that holding similar viewpoints tie the non violent to the violent. That the non violent are in some way responsible for the violent acts committed by others simply because they hold similar viewpoints. In the case of El-Paso, that because the gunman holds similar viewpoints to the greater Republican/Conservative community than the Republican/Conservative community is somehow responsible for the shootings in El-Paso.

That's a great argument when your talking about those extreme Republicans; its a great way to shut out those extreme Republicans from the conversation. They hold similar viewpoints to the gunman and so we can dismiss them because they are somehow responsible for the actions carried out by the gunman. We can demanded, as recompense, that they change their view point if they want to back in to the discussion.

.... but what happens when the gunman holds viewpoints that we do not considered extreme. What if the gunman's motives are because he loves democracy and felt that his actions where the only way to make people understand how great democracy is? Must we now distances ourselves from democracy?

Its a slippery slop you are advocating; if we allow your way of thinking to become the norm; all our real enemies need to do is associate our most cherished beliefs with events like mass shootings and we will eventually give them up.



posted on Aug, 6 2019 @ 11:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: knowledgehunter0986

Why do you hate law enforcement?


What does law enforcement have to do with anything?



posted on Aug, 6 2019 @ 11:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: Middleoftheroad

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: ketsuko

The shooting in Dayton had nothing to do with politics.
They are just trying to make it so for some weird reason or another.


Your blatant lies are a disgrace to this site. You just had numerous posters link proof that ties the Dayton shooter to Antifa and still deny facts in another thread. Then come in this thread and spread lies. You’re a shill and the worse kind of troll.


I read your post and I am trying to be open minded. So I started trying to find out if there was any truth to your claim "proof that ties the Dayton shooter to Antifa". All I found was the Dayton shooter tweeted or liked the idea of Antifa using violence against far right groups who use violence.

There are two ways to look at this. Either a person takes the middle ground and say we must have the rule of law and condemn political violence by any group left or right. Or, take the position the from one side where you claim the other group is a political terrorist organization but your side is not.

I find too many people on the right only criticizing Antifa but never speaking out against the violence from the right. And when someone points out the violence also exists on the right like the way the OP did, you end up with a 500 post thread with unlimited amounts of right wing vitriolic hyperbole.

People on the right need to have a better education on Antifa:

Antifa

Antifa has been around since before WWII. Like everything on the left, no one is in charge. "Antifa is not an interconnected or unified organization, but rather a movement without a leadership structure, comprising multiple autonomous groups and individuals." But in spite of this I hear people on the right use the word "leftist" like everyone is on the same page all part of the same organization. It is NOT. The left is completely disorganized with NO central leadership or authority. This is what makes the left great! There are no leaders. No one is in charge. No authority bullying everyone else into submission.

I generally do not understand the way the right thinks. Groups like Antifa are protesting against right wing groups that promote hatred and intolerance. Someone please explain to me why being against the promotion of hatred and intolerance is in itself promoting hatred and intolerance. It seems to me if Fascism did not exist, then Antifa would not exist. People sympathetic to Antifa's goals claim when people speak hatred it leads to violence. We know advertising works otherwise people would not spend billions on advertising. We know yelling "fire" in a theater is not free-speech because it could lead to people being trampled to death. You could make a case that hate speech should be regulated because it leads to violence.

There are far more loud mouth right wingers on ATS than left wingers. My question to all you right wing loud mouths is do you support the rule of law and do you condemn violence being done by right wing extremist groups? Take the guy who ran over the left wing protesters in Charlotte who got life in prison. Do you support the result?

My hope is everyone can at least agree we must have the rule of law and condemn any form of violence. I am a far left liberal Democrat but I support the rule of law and condemn violence. There I said it. Now shut up.


edit on 6-8-2019 by dfnj2015 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 6 2019 @ 11:39 AM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

Gimmie a break, there are several threads on the Dayton shooter filled with the same divisive sh@t, getting tired of it from everybody..WHAT THE F@#$ DOES IT MATTER!!

Oh but the media..F#CK the media..think for yourselves. If you think it's right to score points off dead people..carry on..EVERYBODY, BOTH SIDES!!!



posted on Aug, 6 2019 @ 11:40 AM
link   
Thankfully trumps FBI director does in fact think and know far right extremists are the largest domestic terrorist threat.

Libs are closing in though so don't worry folks you can keep arguing..

By the way motive and intent are different in the cases. Not by the media standards by actual criminal justice terminology. Dayton victims were not conservatives. They were just people he wanted to kill and was hearing voices.

Anyone extreme about partisan politics has a mental illness imo



posted on Aug, 6 2019 @ 11:40 AM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

I can't discuss that post. According to the moderator that removed that post, I have a serious manners problem for calling out the cold hard truth.



posted on Aug, 6 2019 @ 11:41 AM
link   
a reply to: knowledgehunter0986

Numerous law enforcement agencies have identified Right Wing extremism as the greatest threat in this country.



posted on Aug, 6 2019 @ 11:44 AM
link   
a reply to: LSU2018

No he was not. He was a kid with a lot of problems to do with violence but it had nothing to do with antifa or politics.
He shot his sister for christs sake. It was obviously a domestic issue that got way out of hand.
But this guy had issues going back to highschool and none of it had to do with politics.

Why is this such an important issue with you?

Lots of antifa activity in Dayton.... you'd think he would have been involved in some way or another if he really was an activist. But there is no cyber or paper trail to support that except for a single retweet of an antifa tweet.
From two months ago...
www.newsweek.com...




top topics



 
12
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join