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.

 

Alabama man arrested for slashing baby Trump Balloon .

page: 22
36
<< 19  20  21    23  24  25 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 11 2019 @ 10:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: Fallingdown
a reply to: Liquesence

Oh so your position is you can break some laws but not others.

If you had to make exceptions to your position you don’t have a position you have a sermon .


There are just and unjust laws.

And as stated earlier in this thread, by me:


If you try to make an exception for his criminal behavior based on his "position" or supposed "statement" it's not a position. It's your sermon on why you think his criminal behavior it right.




posted on Nov, 11 2019 @ 10:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: Fallingdown


You posting that might be the most poignant display of the Dunning–Kruger effect that I've ever witnessed. LMAO



posted on Nov, 11 2019 @ 10:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: Fallingdown
a reply to: Liquesence

“ Move the goalpost” 🤦‍♂️

I’ve held my same position since page 1 . Lol

You people are hilarious. I’ve seen this 1000 times a group is on the losing end of an argument. So they keep patting each other‘s back‘s .



No you havent.

You just admitted last page that you originally claimed some posters on here had violated Hoyts rights, only to then have people point out how absurd that was and you then say you change your mind and you were wrong about that.

You said that hoyt has a right to be heard, then claimed you never said not listening to someone was a violation of their rights.



posted on Nov, 11 2019 @ 10:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: fleabit
I swear, Trump has his sheep drinking so deeply in his kool-aid, they can't discern right from wrong.


In all fairness, there are some pretty vocal ATS Trump supporters in here disagreeing with him as well.



posted on Nov, 11 2019 @ 10:50 PM
link   
a reply to: redmage

Jesus lady you’ve really got to get your own material . Lol

You claimed that you specifically condemned the left for stealing magna hatch as a violation of the First Amendment .

But you can’t make it clear which proves I’m right .

You won’t stand up for children .

You can’t clarify your statement .

And I’ve got you as confused as a baby in a topless bar .

Watch I’ll ask another question you won’t answer .


If Trump wins the tariff battle. Will it benefit the US and benefit our children and grandchildren ?

Yes or no ?

Here’s another one

“So your position is if you break a law in the process of expressing yourself or giving your opinion.

Your position/opinion/ expression shouldn’t be acknowledged “.



posted on Nov, 11 2019 @ 10:52 PM
link   
a reply to: fleabit


Because a guy commits a crime you approve of, it's not a crime?


Who said it wasn’t a crime ?



posted on Nov, 11 2019 @ 10:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: redmage

originally posted by: fleabit
I swear, Trump has his sheep drinking so deeply in his kool-aid, they can't discern right from wrong.


In all fairness, there are some pretty vocal ATS Trump supporters in here disagreeing with him as well.


Me being one of them

Political differences are one thing. We should all agree that political violence is not justified.

And certainly I thought we could all agree that no one has a a first amendment right to be heard, but clearly at least one person disagrees.



posted on Nov, 11 2019 @ 10:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Liquesence


To be a protest it would have to, well protest, or be against, something (baby Trump blimp at a Trump rally). Otherwise it would just be in support of something (MAGA hat at a Trump rally).

I'm glad we agree. The blimp was a protest; those who chose to wear a MAGA cap to the game were not protesting.

I will take it one step farther: a protest is an act that is intended to draw attention. Wearing a MAGA cap, a "I hate Trump!" cap, or anything like that is not an overt attempt to draw attention. It is a personal statement. Flying a balloon like the one discussed is certainly an attempt to draw attention.

I also state that the balloon was not even a legitimate protest; it was more of an attempt to incite a riot (which it almost succeeded in apparently). There was nothing political that occurred at the game. It was simply two teams competing publicly. The fact that the President chose to attend had nothing to do with that. I watched the entire game; the announcer mentioned Trump being there a few times, but in a neutral fashion and there was nothing else aired. I never even saw him during the game, as is proper. I would have been quite upset had there been more than a couple of seconds shot of him anyway. Donald Trump is not on either team. I watched to see the game, not Donald Trump, and certainly not some ignoramus's attempt to start trouble.

TheRedneck



posted on Nov, 11 2019 @ 10:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Liquesence


There are just and unjust laws.


I’d like to be in the court room when you try to explain that to a judge . 😂

Whole bunch of people hitting me up again. If I don’t reply its because I’m single this dolt out .



posted on Nov, 11 2019 @ 10:57 PM
link   
a reply to: Fallingdown

You do realize asking a bunch of questions that have absolutely nothing to do with what is being discussed isnt someohow proving you are correct.

In fact its the opposite, it shows you are desperate to change the subject because you have no legitimate defense of your position.

Ironically, the fact you are trying to say someones opinion is irrelevant if they dont have the same opinion as you on questions about immigrant children is basically exactly what you are criticizing people doing to hoyt.



posted on Nov, 11 2019 @ 10:57 PM
link   
a reply to: RetsuUnohana

Actually, no, I don't remember it. There have been so many incidents like that which have occurred since 2016 I have lost count. It's almost like someone wants a civil war, and it seems that someone has many supporters.

To that I respond: read the first line in my signature.

TheRedneck



posted on Nov, 11 2019 @ 11:00 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

You’re avoiding my question by nitpicking one post. Plus with me being the only honest person on this thread I admitted I was wrong twice . That’s why I’m always going to win arguments with you I’m honest and you’re not .

Prove I didn’t .

What’s the matter are you stuck in a corner .

Again let’s see what your position is .


“So your position is if you break a law in the process of expressing yourself or giving your opinion.

Your position/opinion/ expression shouldn’t be acknowledged “.



posted on Nov, 11 2019 @ 11:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: Fallingdown
You claimed that you specifically condemned the left for stealing magna hatch as a violation of the First Amendment But you can’t make it clear which proves I’m right .


Sorry, little miss, but the only thing you've proven is your own hypocrisy. I've condemned messing with MAGA hats numerous times, but unlike you, I'm not a hypocrite who will condemn illegal activity from one side and not the other.


You won’t stand up for children


Another lie. There are more ways to stand up for children than only believing in big government, more bureaucracy, and trusting that they would be responsible with something like a DNA database.


If Trump wins the tariff battle. Will it benefit the US and benefit our children and grandchildren ?


Again trying to change the subject because you're looking so foolish in regards to your Hoyt argument. LOL

It would finally end these farmer bailouts that are starting to make the Wall Street bailouts look like pocket change. That would be good, but has nothing to do with Hoyt.


“So your position is if you break a law in the process of expressing yourself or giving your opinion.

Your position/opinion/ expression shouldn’t be acknowledged “.


That's not my position, nor is it a question. LOL
edit on 11/11/19 by redmage because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 11 2019 @ 11:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: Fallingdown
a reply to: Liquesence


There are just and unjust laws.


I’d like to be in the court room when you try to explain that to a judge . 😂

Whole bunch of people hitting me up again. If I don’t reply its because I’m single this dolt out .





Id like to be in the court room when you tried to explain to a judge the first amendment means people have the right to be heard.



posted on Nov, 11 2019 @ 11:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

My bad how about this one ?

“So your position is if you break a law in the process of expressing yourself or giving your opinion.

Your position/opinion/ expression shouldn’t be acknowledged “.

You do realize avoiding a question that has everything to do with what is being discussed is proving I am correct.



posted on Nov, 11 2019 @ 11:04 PM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck


Wearing a MAGA cap, a "I hate Trump!" cap, or anything like that is not an overt attempt to draw attention.


In general, no. Again it depends on circumstances.


Flying a balloon like the one discussed is certainly an attempt to draw attention.


Of course, and akin to protest. To make a statement against something.


I also state that the balloon was not even a legitimate protest


What is a legitimate protest?


There was nothing political that occurred at the game.


The president was there. It comes with the territory. And, the right to do it.


edit on 11-11-2019 by Liquesence because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 11 2019 @ 11:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler


Id like to be in the court room when you tried to explain to a judge the first amendment means people have the right to be heard.


I might actually watch your YouTube channel if you tried to explain to your viewers that the first amendment means you’re not allowed to be heard .



posted on Nov, 11 2019 @ 11:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Fallingdown

Im beginning to think you have a seriious comprehension issue.

Let me try onvce kmore to answert this question which I have donbe clearly several times.

The answer is NOOOOOOO!!!!!!! That is not what I am saying.

Did you get that. NOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!


I am saying that any person can decide for whatever reason they want to not acknowledge another persons opinion. One reason could be the broke the law. One reason could be they are hypocritical. One reason could be they are boring, or of a different political party, or different religion, or different gender, or different height, or they are a red head, or they like horseback riding, and on and on.

Do you get it yet?

There is no first amendment right to be heard.

I am not saying "All people who break the law should not be heard from"

I am saying even if a person would think that, they have that right, and are not violating anyones first amendment right.

And I am saying I personally dont give a crap what this vandal who destroys others people property says his reason was for doing so, just like I dont care what antifas lame excuses for why they censor and attack people are.



posted on Nov, 11 2019 @ 11:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler
The answer is NOOOOOOO!!!!!!!
Did you get that. NOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!


You're probably going to need to state that a bit clearer.



posted on Nov, 11 2019 @ 11:13 PM
link   
a reply to: redmage


That's not my position


If that’s not your position .

What is your position ?

Is this your position ?

“So your position is if you break a law in the process of expressing yourself or giving your opinion ?

Your position/opinion/ expression shouldn’t be acknowledged “.



new topics

top topics



 
36
<< 19  20  21    23  24  25 >>

log in

join