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.

 

BLM and Antifa members who riot are terrorists!

page: 2
60
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 7 2020 @ 10:20 AM
link   
a reply to: Stevenmonet

Initially? No. But after 20 years in Afghanistan, a lifetime in the ME, we haven’t stamped out terrorism, just like drugs and poverty are still very much a thing.

We just haven’t given this clash a name yet.....

I’m suggesting (not very well) The War on White Racist America is going to be a hard one to win ideologically speaking, when everything is burning well past Election Day....


edit on 7-9-2020 by slatesteam because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 7 2020 @ 10:28 AM
link   
a reply to: slatesteam

The war on terror was never war it was just a nice political sound bite.

Its like the War on Drugs or the War on Covid, its not a real war, its a poetical sound bite.

Now sure the War on Terror encompassed some actual wars, such as the War in Afghanistan or the second Gulf War but its also lots of other things like the militarisation of the police, drone attacks, covert actions. Its more of an umbrella sound bite that describes a series of actions taken against terrorists.



posted on Sep, 7 2020 @ 10:29 AM
link   
a reply to: Stevenmonet

Spot on



I'm just wondering lately, if we are begging for an ounce of common sense /normalcy to return to everyday life, and they provide it, what will be the solution to the problem/reaction?

This whole situation worldwide has set the bar very low as to what we are willing to return to that qualifies as being content.



posted on Sep, 7 2020 @ 10:34 AM
link   
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Ok, I’m so tired of this. You: “It isn’t just BLM and ANTIFA rioting there is violence on all sides...why are you not calling both sides, left and right, terrorists...”

You may be right, and I very possibly could have missed some violent rioting done by right-wind groups.

So please, could you direct me to the times and places where a group on the right has burned cities, taken over entire city blocks with nightly firebombs and intimidation and graffiti? Which right-wing group, where, and when? Bonus if you have links to videos. Because friend, there are literally hundreds of videos of these ANTIFA and BLM folks violently destroying property and putting many people in harm’s way. Please post a video of the right doing the same thing.

Please be specific, and thank you for educating me on this.



posted on Sep, 7 2020 @ 10:36 AM
link   
a reply to: KansasGirl

To be fair my argument against calling them racist is way more than simply saying well if you call one side a terrorist you need to call the other side terorists.

Read my first post on this thread.



posted on Sep, 7 2020 @ 10:41 AM
link   
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Brother, I don’t think you understand the difference between fact and opinion.



posted on Sep, 7 2020 @ 10:42 AM
link   
Feelings are contagious, there is a function in our mind called "emotional contagion". This is also in animals, i gues it comes from evolution as a tool to help survive. People are walking mood inductors.

So i am just worryed how this function could create a chain reaction in situations where is 2 groups or more are at others throat, and by reading news it look`s like allready happening .

I think emotional contagion works on both way, so positive feelings can influence others then also.

So now, at least looking from here,Europe it does look like emotional contagion is spreading ...not good..


TPTB knows how to spread bad emotions.



Someone is clearly infecting people with bad emotions



posted on Sep, 7 2020 @ 10:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: KansasGirl
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Brother, I don’t think you understand the difference between fact and opinion.


No I do.

Here let clear it up for you:

Opinion: BLM and ANTIFA are terrorist organisations.

Fact: According to the US State Department Al-Qa'ida is a terrorist organisation.

Just calling them terrorists does not make it true, I think people who put pineapple on pizza are terrorists to Italian cuisine, thats an opinion though, not a fact.



posted on Sep, 7 2020 @ 10:45 AM
link   
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

A violent act by an individual or group is not good enough to be called terrorism. Because it is not perpetrated to coerce the government or citizens for a political objective.

Is this a reading comprehension problem?

I can call you a nazi and punch you in the face, but that is not terrorism.

If I chant no justice no peace or demand you shut down your police force while I burn your city and cause personal and property damge every night for months on end that is terrorism.

One is senseless misguided violence.

The other is violent coersion for a political or social agenda.

A group of 3 or more with a common purpose commiting harm to people and/or property can be declared a riot without extorting the government with said violence for political or social objectives.

Hence a rioter is just that until they use violence or threats of violence to extort the government or citizens to achieve a social or political objective.

I provided my evidence to support my claim that BLM and antifa rioters are terrorists, yet you say what about proud boys or patriot prayer, they have been violent so why not call them terrorists too? Great I say. I sure will just as soon as you show your evidence to back up your claim.

I have shown that Rioters are not automatically terrorists. The definition of the two terms is not mutually inclusive.

Just as I pointed out that a member of a political or social group commiting violence on somone is also not 8n and of itself terrorism. You are either intentionally or unintentionaly missing the importance of:

"violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives”

Which is the majority of the definition.

Obfuscation, and what about-ism while misrepresenting or ignoring the facts a cogent argument does not make.

As stated earlier even were I to concede your what about xyz conservative group argument, one terrorist act does not cancel out another. So you have no response to my argument. All you have said is if they are guilty so is xyz, and that does not make them any less guilty.

This is why what about so and so who did it too.. is not a valid argument, ever!

In fact in most polite debates such a tactic is not even considered an argument, but this is the mud pit so feel free to bring the weakest excuse of a counter argument you have.

Just don't expect it to help your argument.



edit on 7-9-2020 by Stevenmonet because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 7 2020 @ 10:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: KansasGirl

To be fair my argument against calling them racist is way more than simply saying well if you call one side a terrorist you need to call the other side terorists.

Read my first post on this thread.


I did read your first post. That’s why I asked you a question you won’t address, and several other members have posed the same question to you.

Why won’t you provide videos or ANY other evidence other than your word, of right-wing groups rioting? Why won’t you do this?

If you come back with one of the standard replies like “Do your own research, I won’t do your homework for you” or “I won’t give you any links or evidence because you just won’t get it,” you should be banned from posting.

So once again: just provide some real evidence of right-wing groups rioting. Thank you.



posted on Sep, 7 2020 @ 10:49 AM
link   
a reply to: Stevenmonet

Ok can I just clear this up because it seems to be the sticking point.

In your opinion ANTIFA/BLM are terrorists, thats fine but can I just check that you understand this is not a fact because the fact of the matter is that they have not been designated a terrorist organisation by the FBI or State Department.



posted on Sep, 7 2020 @ 10:52 AM
link   
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

I’d say No Comment, like you’re telling me something I don’t know.

But I’ll just thank you for helping to elucidate my point in case I was further unclear on how I view all the BS
edit on 7-9-2020 by slatesteam because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 7 2020 @ 10:53 AM
link   
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Just bc i haven’t been deemed a racist by a government institution or “Southern Poverty” studies doesn’t mean I’m not one.

See how that works?



posted on Sep, 7 2020 @ 11:02 AM
link   
"These Violent Delights Have Violent Ends"



posted on Sep, 7 2020 @ 11:05 AM
link   
a reply to: slatesteam

Initially? Hmm ok since 9/11/01 what political party has attempted to end congressional approval for the war on terror, or failed to re-instate the patriot act?

Last I heard Ron Paul, his son, and trump were the only three unless you can find me more. And three politicians in 19 years is not what I would call bipartisan political willpower.

Fact is the war on terror and patriot act have only been further buttressed over time.

Why?

Because nobody likes to have somone coerce them with unlawful violence. Weird huh?

We give our elected government a monopoly on coercive force when exorcising their constitutional authority. That way when anyone else tries to pull that ish we know we can deffend ourselves and expect our government to enforce its monopoly and our right to be free from unlawful violence against our person or property.

The war on drugs is an entirely separate issue, but I can see how it has added to the current state of moral outrage and civil unrest we are facing here in the states.

The clash has a name and it has since 2001 it is the global war on terrorism. The fact that it is on our streets every night and the media refuses to call it what it is because the perpitratores share their social or political idiology is the only thing causing any confusion as far as I can see.

Put Kkk signs in the rioters hands

or
have the rioters shout no 2nd no peace while they burn and loot

or
have them march through the getto demanding all welfare offices be closed down or we burn them down while they fire bomb police and attack bystanders and peaceful counter protesters

Do you think the media calls them terrorists then?


edit on 7-9-2020 by Stevenmonet because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 7 2020 @ 11:20 AM
link   
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin
I defined my terms.

I have laid out the facts to support my conclusion regarding BLM and antifa's organizational objectives being political and or social as well as the violent means they advocate and their affiliates use in the streets to coerce citizens and the government.

You say my argument is factually wrong, but you provide no evidence to support your argument. The law is always an argument until each case is settled. And it takes evidence and facts to support any cogent argument.

You have yet to make a cogent argument. Instead you have provided what ifs, and what aboutisms. That is why you keep getting called out for making baseless claims void of evidence, counterpoints, or any semblance of a cogent argument.
edit on 7-9-2020 by Stevenmonet because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 7 2020 @ 11:47 AM
link   
a reply to: Stevenmonet

Look OP, I’m not disagreeing and you m not trying to be argumentative, I’m just hitting your post with a different light is all. Clearly there is SOMETHING a certain faction of America is fighting for/against. But since it is subject to political opinion, it’s not so easy to name the way everyone can align against drugs, poverty, terrorism, etc.

Also since 9/11 it’s the MEDIA that has betrayed us if anyone or any party. Investigative journalism is a thing of the past. Just GroupThink now...







posted on Sep, 7 2020 @ 12:30 PM
link   
a reply to: jtma508

To answer your question - keep an open mind. I'm NOT a Trump supporter. I don't even consider the burning of the Minneapolis police station to be terrorism - I thought it was a normal reaction to what happened and the decades of the police not being held accountable for their actions.

But what has happened after that was not in response to the Police but an excuse to try to break down society. I came to that conclusion not from watching Fox but from watching live streams and seeing it myself. Police have been doing the same things for decades, do you REALLY believe that in the last four months, people suddenly cared? Just a coincidence it happened right before an election?

And to answer your specific question, no I don't think any opposing force is doing it to instill fear in the general population. Yes, a few may have done some illegal things but the response was not to create terror. You better hope that Trump wins because if he doesn't then they right will also start to use the same techniques and you will be on the receiving end of this. The ultra rich can afford their own police force, can you?



posted on Sep, 7 2020 @ 12:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kenzo

Feelings are contagious, there is a function in our mind called "emotional contagion". This is also in animals, i gues it comes from evolution as a tool to help survive. People are walking mood inductors.

So i am just worryed how this function could create a chain reaction in situations where is 2 groups or more are at others throat, and by reading news it look`s like allready happening .

I think emotional contagion works on both way, so positive feelings can influence others then also.

So now, at least looking from here,Europe it does look like emotional contagion is spreading ...not good..


TPTB knows how to spread bad emotions.



Someone is clearly infecting people with bad emotions
Huh? What are you talking about and in what relation does it have to this thread? “Emotional Contagion” as you put it, isn’t about “infecting” others, lol, or a “survival trait”.

Emotional Contagion is regarded in two aspects, both as a theory that postulates how we as a people project our feelings and thus people react accordingly as a result. This sounds like something fringe, such as Empathic people, i.e. empaths.
In fact, the second aspect of Emotional Contagion is actually a functioning component, primarily for, Empathy.

What is Empathy and who are empathic people? Well empathy is to ability to understand and feel what another is feeling in an emotional state. Empathic people, well I don’t think there is such a thing, any reference er’s on the fringe in regards to “Empaths” and we don’t have that.

When discussing emotionally charged subjects, sometimes empathy plays a part in peoples reasonings, there are indications that an individual who seems uncaring can also be empathic but simply displays it differently.

I still fail to see how this can be construed as infecting others unless they are extremely ignorant people, like say, a MOB?



posted on Sep, 7 2020 @ 01:49 PM
link   
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

I’ll ask it a third time: videos or other proof or even evidence of right-wing or conservative groups rioting? Looting, burning?

So, you’re not going to provide any, is that correct?




top topics



 
60
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join