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: 41
36
<< 38  39  40    42  43  44 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 13 2019 @ 04:37 PM
link   
a reply to: redmage

Read redneck’s post.


edit on 13-11-2019 by Fallingdown because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 13 2019 @ 04:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: Fallingdown
I back came here to make a correction on some of my earlier statements when I said his first amendment rights shouldn’t be denied. Again that was loose words bad grammar take your pick .


More lies.

Sure, you made a "correction", but since then you have flipped back on that numerous times.

Even here on the last page (40) you told Critical Stinker...


originally posted by: Fallingdown
Yes unlike you I don’t selectively apply constitutional rights...


So trying to claim innocence, and hide behind a "correction" that you've flipped on as recently as the previous page is hilarious.

You're still arguing that Hoyt, or even AntiFa destroying someone else's property is their "constitutional right" when it's not.
edit on 11/13/19 by redmage because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 13 2019 @ 05:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Fallingdown

Still beating a dead horse! Boy you got owned like a preschooler and acted like one in the process. Pathetic.



posted on Nov, 13 2019 @ 05:17 PM
link   
Lol

Look at this over a three day period.

Hell I’ve even had time to post elsewhere .

Can you say triggered ?















posted on Nov, 13 2019 @ 05:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Joecanada11

How so can you elaborate ?



posted on Nov, 13 2019 @ 05:20 PM
link   
Trifecta
edit on 13-11-2019 by Fallingdown because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 13 2019 @ 05:21 PM
link   
Dbl



posted on Nov, 13 2019 @ 05:26 PM
link   
a reply to: Grimpachi


There is no constitutional right to listen


I’m gonna agree with that again.

Is everyone going to ignore my agreement again ? 😆


3...2...1

Triggered Smidge : more lies 🤦‍♂️



posted on Nov, 13 2019 @ 05:33 PM
link   
a reply to: Fallingdown

I know you have a hard time following, but I was responding to Redneck in that post.

But, since you are reading replies again I wonder if you still claim DB violated Hoyt's rights.
edit on 13-11-2019 by Grimpachi because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 13 2019 @ 05:49 PM
link   
a reply to: Grimpachi

So you’re saying I can’t agree with you when you’re disagreeing with someone else ?

You guys are going to have to post some rules or something .

Nobody actually violated Hoyt rights . ( are you going to play word games now )

Honesty will set you free. You should try it sometime .

Next ?

3....2...1

Triggered smidge : more lies 🤦‍♂️


Edit;

If I made any other statement either directly or remotely similar to the claim that somebody violated Hoyts constitutional rights I was wrong on them too.

And to reiterate I agree that no one has the right to be heard because that would imply everybody has to listen to them. But they have the right to be listen to by people that want to hear/see there voice or expression .
edit on 13-11-2019 by Fallingdown because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 13 2019 @ 06:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Fallingdown

Again you confuse "amused" with "triggered", and again you resort to trying to attack the messenger instead of the message.

It only proves your desperation, and the fact that your argument has no legs to stand on. LMAO



posted on Nov, 13 2019 @ 06:18 PM
link   
a reply to: redmage

Fair enough. So Hoyt Hutchinson arrived at the stadium with the exact same intent as the protestors with the balloon... to make a scene. I stand corrected.

TheRedneck



posted on Nov, 13 2019 @ 06:27 PM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

Not quite, he went to the stadium with the intent to destroy someone else's property and "get rowdy".

The protesters looked like they were behaving themselves vocally, but peacefully, and not vandalizing anything.

Also, I'm not sure if it's the same in AL, but where I'm at, "fixin' ta get rowdy" is another way to say "getting into fist fights".

I think the intent of chanting and floating a balloon, is a little different than the intent of assault and vandalism.
edit on 11/13/19 by redmage because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 13 2019 @ 06:32 PM
link   
a reply to: redmage

Attack the messenger? You agreed with me do you deny it ?

Is your position that if anyone breaks a law in the process of expressing their self or giving their opinion.

Their position/opinion/ expression shouldn’t be acknowledged by anyone even the people that consider it their right to hear the position “?



posted on Nov, 13 2019 @ 06:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Grimpachi


There is no constitutional right to listen. There is no law against it either. If it was a constitutional right then people could force their way into auditoriums and such of speakers they wanted to hear and the police wouldn't be able to stop them.

Thank you for posting that. It mimics my exact point I have been trying to make in this thread. In a way, "setting up speakers" is exactly what the protestors were trying to do: create a public spectacle to interfere with those attending the game.


I am also not sure you are right about the protestors since they do have the right to assemble and the right to free speech. If it is one person or a group shouldn't matter each one has those rights. I also read they dd have a permit to be there.

They do not have the right to protest on private property. Need I again post the First Amendment?

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

A private organization is not required to support another's right to assemble... only Congress is bound by the First Amendment. Ironically, I see in your posts the exact same (incorrect) position I see in those by Fallingdown: does this group trying to fly the balloon have some right to be heard? It would seem so, since you apparently support their 'right' to hijack a major sporting event to proclaim their message.

There is no right to be heard.

As to the permit question:
Alabama Student Government Association Responds to Report Saying it Warned Against President Trump Protests

The final line of the letter contained a warning about protests. It reads, “Any organizations that engage in disruptive behavior during the game will be removed from block seating instantly for the remainder of the season.” The Alabama SGA did not respond to a request for comment on the letter from the Alabama Media Group.

No, there were no permits issued for protests during the game. The University of Alabama specifically demanded that there be no protests.

TheRedneck



posted on Nov, 13 2019 @ 06:50 PM
link   
a reply to: Fallingdown

I know what you were trying to convey, but words matter. There is no right to be heard, but there is a right to hear that which is publicly offered. Again, that is the basis of the oft-invoked freedom of the press. One has the right to hear all sides of a story as those sides are reported. Congress cannot legislate against the right for those sides to be made public.

Also, the First Amendment applies to Congress making laws, not to people expressing themselves. There is no legal obligation for anyone, including Hoyt Hutchinson, to individually respect another's right to free speech. The First Amendment has nothing to do with the topic of this thread.

TheRedneck



posted on Nov, 13 2019 @ 06:55 PM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck


They do not have the right to protest on private property.


Public universities are not private property; however, some do have "free speech zones."

That said...


The balloon stood roughly a mile from Bryant-Denny Stadium where the Crimson Tide and Tigers -- two of the top teams in college football according to the Associated Press -- battled to a 46-41 victory for LSU.


Doesn't sound like that was on campus.


Ahead of the game, Gulas told CNN earlier that the balloon could be found near the corner of Hackberry Lane and 15th Street.
CNN

While large scale coordinated protests generally require a permit, one can stand on a public sidewalk and hold a balloon or sign without a permit, and it is entirely within one's rights.



posted on Nov, 13 2019 @ 07:01 PM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

First I don't believe flying a balloon is hijacking a game and they did acquire a permit to set up there. You seem to assume they were going into the stadium. I have not seen anywhere it was stated that they intend to or attempted to enter the stadium. If I am wrong please provide a link.

There have been many protests with that balloon and without where the protestors stayed outside of events.

In fact I looked it up for you.

link

The balloon stood roughly a mile from Bryant-Denny Stadium where the Crimson Tide and Tigers — two of the top teams in college football according to the Associated Press — battled to a 46-41 victory for LSU.


So their protest was a mile away according to reports and they did have a permit. Do you still claim they hijacked the game against the school rules? Do you still claim they had no right to assemble?



posted on Nov, 13 2019 @ 07:05 PM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

Apparently my words don’t matter because nobody’s listening to them . Lol

Why doesn’t this get across to anyone ?

By now my only guess is that nobody here is use to honesty .


There is no right to be heard,


I agree !

I’ve agreed with that position many times.

But I agree again !

Yet it keeps getting thrown in my face why ?

Reading this statement can you understand why I think people are playing games ?

Again I agree no one has the right to be heard.

It’s kind of silly .

I’ve also agreed on multiple occasions that nobody violated his rights .

And again as a disclaimer if I made any other comment that is a remotely similar allegation I was wrong.

That should be the end of it but watch it won’t .

Everybody knows what my point is. I’ve had the same position since page one but instead of anybody being honest they want to dance around it .

I asked them if this is their position. The answer is obvious no. But variables get thrown on it every time even though my position is simple .


“Is your position that if anyone breaks a law in the process of expressing their self or giving their opinion.

Their position/opinion/ expression shouldn’t be acknowledged by anyone even the people that consider it their right to hear the position “ ?

Like I said I had to word that to make sure there weren’t any figurative words in it that semantics could be played on .

But no no one has the right to be heard .


edit on 13-11-2019 by Fallingdown because: (no reason given)

edit on 13-11-2019 by Fallingdown because: (no reason given)

edit on 13-11-2019 by Fallingdown because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 13 2019 @ 07:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
They do not have the right to protest on private property.


Yeah, I'm still a bit surprised that it wasn't shut down, but usually protests are given quite a bit of leeway by law enforcement as long as the protesters remain civil.

Since the protest appears to have been on and near the campus, and it's a public state university instead of a private college, is that still considered private property or public property in AL?
edit on 11/13/19 by redmage because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
36
<< 38  39  40    42  43  44 >>

log in

join