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.

 

Crossing Moral Boundaries on ATS : Promoting and Excusing Murder, Torture and War Crimes

page: 3
9
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 14 2008 @ 10:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by SaviorComplex

You believe that no one is allowed to have an honest disagreement with you. You believe that no one should be allowed to believe the War in Iraq is justified

And thus, you think they should be banned, their views restricted because they have a disagreement with you.


Oh I see. Well this is interesting. Please, tell me more of what I believe.

I believe no one is allowed to have honest disagreement? Again: show me where I made such a statement. Stop the BS Savior...

I believe no one should be allowed to support the War in Iraq? Again: show me where I made such a statement. Show me. Or stop the BS, Savior.

I think they should be banned?
Again: SHOW ME Savior. Are you going to keep spouting unfounded accusations or are you going to put some meat on this?


How tiresome.

I never once claimed that views should be restricted because they disagree with 'me'. They disagree with the LAW... that is the point of my OP.

I could care less how spectacularly you manage to miss the point. I will tell you though, you're doing an excellent job


Carry on.




posted on Mar, 14 2008 @ 10:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by NewWorldOver
Show me a single line where I called to restrict speech. Show me a single line where I called for censorship of ANY statement...

Show me.


Right here...


Originally posted by NewWorldOver
If you want to allow political smut to run rabid on a conspiracy forum : again, that's fine. I am not a moderator or a staff member.


These people disagree with you, and thus you say their speech should be restricted. You ask if we should allow such things, explicitly implying that you do not believe it should be allowed.

And to further demonstrate how you cannot stand to have anyone disagree with you, when I express my opinion that this is tantamount to censorship, you call my disagreement political-smut. Thus equating any disagreement in the same arena as approval for genocide, murder, and various other atrocities.

Read that again -- you think any disagreement with you is on the same level as the worst of crimes.



posted on Mar, 14 2008 @ 10:42 AM
link   
^ Truly desperate twisting of words and re-interpretation.

How sad to witness such behavior. I can't watch anymore... this is the same political mud-shovelling that I think has no place on ATS.

Keep it up.



posted on Mar, 14 2008 @ 10:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by NewWorldOver
Oh I see. Well this is interesting. Please, tell me more of what I believe.

I believe no one is allowed to have honest disagreement? Again: show me where I made such a statement.

I believe no one should be allowed to support the War in Iraq? Again: show me where I made such a statement. Show me. Or stop the BS, Savior.

I think they should be banned?

I never once claimed that views should be restricted because they disagree with 'me'. They disagree with the LAW... that is the point of my OP.


Here is what you said...


Originally posted by NewWorldOver
If I remember correctly there are Terms and Conditions within this site that prohibit the talk of illegal activity? Mods, is this correct?

It is illegal to murder and torture innocent people or civillians. War crimes constitute illegal activity. If you are excusing or promoting war crimes, you are breaching site contracts.


You immediately declared the death of the little girl was an illegal act, murder. You then said that anyone who said otherwise, that it was an accident of war, that perhaps there was some justification in the shooting, etc...as promoting genocide, war, murder, torture, etc.

Then you said that such speech was in violation of the T&C, and should be prohibited (see bolding above).

In other words, they have to believe the way you do, or they should be prohibited.

That is censorship.

Nor should views be banned because they disagree with the law. We disagree with laws all the time; we think marijuana should be legalized, think taxes are unjustified, etc, etc. etc.

[edit on 14-3-2008 by SaviorComplex]



posted on Mar, 14 2008 @ 10:51 AM
link   
This is simple guys, refrain from the personal commentary or do not post.

No need to post the title of this thread again.

Thank you.



posted on Mar, 14 2008 @ 10:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by NewWorldOver
How sad to witness such behavior. I can't watch anymore... this is the same political mud-shovelling that I think has no place on ATS.


Once again, a call to censorship, and once again showing you cannot handle the slightest amount of debate.

You don't think "political mud-shovelling" should be allowed, then label any disagreement with you as "political mud-shovelling," even when not a single political-comment has been made. A disagreement with you is not "political mud-shovelling."

You just do not want people debating you on certain issues; either they agree or they are "political mud-shovelling" and thus should be prohibited in their speech.



posted on Mar, 14 2008 @ 10:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by SaviorComplex
Nor should views be banned because they disagree with the law. We disagree with laws all the time; we think marijuana should be legalized, think taxes are unjustified, etc, etc. etc.


Again, that was a powerful display of cherry-picking and word-twisting : but I'm not going to repeat myself.

And no, views are not 'banned' for disagreeing with the law. When statements are made that appeal to illegal activity (including murder... drugs... etc.) they are usually warned or the thread is locked.

This whole concept of 'banning' people or posts is something you brought into this thread : not myself.

So please, stop twisting the thread to your own devices and return to the topic. Are there no moral boundaries on ATS that can be re-iterated by T&C?

[edit on 14-3-2008 by NewWorldOver]



posted on Mar, 14 2008 @ 10:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by chissler
This is simple guys, refrain from the personal commentary or do not post.


What is the line here?

The very core of this discussion has to do with personal beliefs, how can one not make personal commentary?



posted on Mar, 14 2008 @ 10:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by SaviorComplex
You just do not want people debating you on certain issues; either they agree or they are "political mud-shovelling" and thus should be prohibited in their speech.


Again, now would be an appropriate time to return to the topic of thread...

I never said I want to discourage debate or disagreement. Not once, Savior. You are baiting me at this point and I'm not going to give you the satisfaction.

Return to the topic.



posted on Mar, 14 2008 @ 11:01 AM
link   
If your post is consisted of "you" "you" "you", it's probably inappropriate.

Discuss the topic and if you insist on discussing one another, do so with respect and courtesy.

Any other questions or comments on this, please u2u me and allow this thread to continue on-topic.

Thanks.



posted on Mar, 14 2008 @ 11:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by SaviorComplex
What is the line here?

The very core of this discussion has to do with personal beliefs, how can one not make personal commentary?


Quite simple really. This post could go 2 ways.

1- Are you being intentionally obtuse?

Personal.

2- The point that chissler was making is that you don't have to make your post personal to get the point across.

Impersonal and correct.



posted on Mar, 14 2008 @ 11:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by NewWorldOver
And no, views are not 'banned' for disagreeing with the law. When statements are made that appeal to illegal activity (including murder... drugs... etc.) they are usually warned or the thread is locked.


That's just the thing. When people disagreed with you in the thread about the girl's death, that is was open for debate whether it was murder, you labelled it as support/appeal for an illegal activity, and thus should be prohibited.

That is an attempt to shut down debate. That is censorship.



posted on Mar, 14 2008 @ 11:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Holygamer
I think this doesn't really belong as a seperate thread here.

It really isn't board business, or a question, just appears to be a venting of anger from a thread.


True. This is not Board business, nor is it a question. In fact, if you ask me, this thread belongs in BTS under "Rants" ..

Basically, NWO, you have a problem with people who do not see the world through your eyes.

There is nothing wrong with this, the fact that you feel such emotion and anger towards this incident is a testiment to your personality.. no one likes to see innocent people killed, tortured or in any way harmed..

However, there are others that see this as unavoidable.. a product of war, and the times we live in. A 10 year old being killed by accident for instance is a horrible thing.. a crime? No.. an accident, an accident caused by war. In war, such events are expected, they should be expected often.. to think that soldiers can always pinpoint the bad guy and kill only enemy fighters in the middle of a city is absurd.

But you need to be more tollerant to other peoples views on different subjects, instead of lashing out and demeaning all other posters that do not express the same emotion as you.. you state how you feel about the subject, counter what others say on the subject.. but not on the posters, nor on the posters opinions. You can hate all those with different views all you want, though I consider that the highest form of hypocracy..

To go as far as to even make a thread about this.... man... I just can't believe it... all because people have opposing views.......



posted on Mar, 14 2008 @ 11:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by NewWorldOver
Return to the topic.


I am on topic.

Disagreement about something is not promotion or excusing murder, torture, or war crimes. It should not be restricted.

Otherwise, it is censorship.



posted on Mar, 14 2008 @ 11:06 AM
link   
This thread has degenerated into assaults on myself.

As a mod just said, if a post consists of 'you you you' it is not about the topic...

Give it a rest. Return to the topic.

I've got members U2Uing me in support of this thread because they are too afraid to stick their neck out.... and why? Because of this garbage. Turning an objective topic into a personall attack.

Stop it. I am now requesting that this thread be locked. However I don't really expect that to happen... after all that would be 'censorship' eh? Censorship of my own opinion even...

Oy vei. At least I can leave this thread with a laugh.


[edit on 14-3-2008 by NewWorldOver]



posted on Mar, 14 2008 @ 11:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rockpuck
No.. an accident, an accident caused by war. In war, such events are expected, they should be expected often...


Most people make this intellectual concession; that these terrible things do happen in war, and that it is unavoidable. But making that acknowledgement does not mean that it is a promotion or an excuse for such things. Nor does such an acknowledgement preclude recognizing it is a tragedy, or that efforts should be made to avoid such incidents in the future, as unavoidable as they may be.

It is not a black and white issue.



posted on Mar, 14 2008 @ 11:12 AM
link   
reply to post by NewWorldOver
 


Most of us who are disagreeing with you, actually despise murder. To say that we promote murder is a bit unfair. The point is this:

If you are not for freedom of speech by people you hate, you are not for freedom of speech at all


[edit on 14-3-2008 by Skyfloating]



posted on Mar, 14 2008 @ 11:12 AM
link   
reply to post by NewWorldOver
 


Woah there buddy .. lol.

You made a thread condemning people with more "conservative" view points.. you should expect a little bit of this discussion directed at you and the topic, as it is you demanding censorship..

If you ask me, again my own opinion, conservatives are by far the minority on ATS, and are often ridiculed and suffer deeaning attacks.. people calling them immoral, evil, baby killers, supporters of torture and crimes against humanity.. all for having opposing views.. one conservative posting on a thread like the one your talking about, and its like a blood bath. For instance, the first post on that 10year old thread that I made was rational and not directed at anyone.. the very next post and several after where personal assaults on my character....

So this goes both ways..

Just be more accepting of other peoples views.. you cannot make a thread and have everyone support you.



posted on Mar, 14 2008 @ 11:16 AM
link   
reply to post by SaviorComplex
 


Its not an excuse.. its not saying that well since # happens in war, don't try to prevent it! .. no, nothing like that.. I am just saying accidents do happen, good people die on both sides..

The soldiers I know would be torn apart inside, mentally and spiritually if they accidently killed a little girl.. soldiers are not cold blood killers.. accidents happen, people who should not be killed are killed.. I think the US does a superb job at protecting civilians and preventing widespread deaths of civilians, compared to other nations. Being held to the highest of standards is a good thing, but never should we EVER expect perfection.



posted on Mar, 14 2008 @ 11:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rockpuck
Woah there buddy .. lol.

You made a thread condemning people with more "conservative" view points.. you should expect a little bit of this discussion directed at you and the topic, as it is you demanding censorship..

If you ask me

Just be more accepting of other peoples views.. you cannot make a thread and have everyone support you.


Good lord. You make it too easy for me.

This thread is not about ME. Sorry to dissapoint you... might want to listen to the mods who are making an effort to dissuay this kind of behavior.


[edit on 14-3-2008 by NewWorldOver]



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join