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.
He's reduced himself to petty insults. His statement and position are, by default, now null and void.
originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Grimpachi
Wait... it was earlier shown that the protestors paid $4000 to rent the balloon. And you don't believe they intended to fly it?
Come on, surely you can see the illogic in that argument.
TheRedneck
originally posted by: TheRedneck
The event was still the target.
All are not being protested, just the political figure in attendance being protested. In this case, the president.
Trump does not suspend being president just because he goes to a ballgame, as stated.
originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
originally posted by: TheRedneck
Furthermore, it is being deployed at an apolitical event...
The event was in a stadium a half mile away, the intersection was not university property.
originally posted by: Fallingdown
The event happened in Monnish Park a public state owned facility .
How can you contend with facts? The protest was in full swing the balloon was not flying and the videos posted show no indication of it being prepared or capable of flying.
As I pointed out it may be because of the power lines which can be seen in the video link I posted. You did look, right?
If you argument is it doesn't seem logical to you then that is a weak argument.
Fine. Explain to me how this balloon was to be seen by one and only one person in a crammed stadium and I will admit your point.
I will also refer you to a physics journal where you can publish your argument; that is a violation of known physical laws. There is likely a Nobel Prize in this if you can make a convincing argument.
What official Presidential functions was he undertaking at this ballgame?
originally posted by: Fallingdown
Actually being at a State owned Park negates your position I believe . Nothing private about those premises .
originally posted by: Fallingdown
The event I’m referring to is the scene of the crime .
originally posted by: Fallingdown
a reply to: Liquesence
So your position is you won’t allow anyone to agree with the position he took ? You speak for everybody and if you could you would censor every detail of what he did .
Correct ?
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 “?
originally posted by: Fallingdown
But could you please explain to me why that technicality would matter ?