Well...I'm putting on my flame suit now...because I know this isn't going to be popular.
I honestly don't see how you can say they did anything wrong. They took a quote from a website and used it in an article/report...it happens all the
time. You don't have to be a member to look at the boards here...they didn't have to agree to any T&C to look at the forums or pull the quotes...I
just honestly don't see the issue.
I constantly speak out against the hate speech on here along with the violent speech on here...and we all know there is plenty of it. If ATS is going
to allow it to be part of the culture here...I don't think you can complain when someone says "Hey...you know that ATS place...lots of hate and
violence being talked about there". This isn't slander...it is the truth. Heck...there was a whole thread dedicated to talking about putting a
$250,000 bounty on the heads of all (men, women, children) illegal immigrants. It got flags, stars, and people voluntering to go do it if it ever
became reality. It was disgusting...I was pretty set on leaving ATS for good because of it.
I don't think "context" has anything to do with it....if anything...the context in these cases probably make it worse.
Let's look at the quotes they used. They all came from the same thread: This One
“When you start talking about terrorists imposing their will on our nation,” explained “Doc Velocity” on the Above Top Secret forums on
March 24, “you must realize that Congressional Democrats are the terrorists who in no way represent the MAJORITY of the American People.”
The quote is exact...they didn't modify it at all...it's not the full post...but the full post doesn't make it sound any better than it is.
Not quite sure who you're talking about here... You mean the MAJORITY of Americans who definitely oppose the bill, or the handful of
politicians in Washington who FORCED this unconstitutional piece of legislation down the throats of the American people against their will?
When you start talking about terrorists imposing their will on our nation, you must realize that Congressional Democrats ARE the terrorists who in no
way represent the MAJORITY of the American People.
America didn't ask for this sort of "change"... And it's highly unlikely that Obama would have even been elected if he had admitted, during his
campaign, that "Change" included forcing every American to purchase health care under penalty of law.
That, my liberal friend, is called UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
Boondock-saints quote is from the same thread...here is from teh report:
“I think I remember an old adage from long ago, can’t remember where I heard it or who said it…but it went something like this: If a man
won’t change his ideals with words, then you change his mind with a bullet.” Post by “boondock-saint” on the Above Top Secret Forums, March
Here is his exact quote from page 1 of that thread:
DC is still not listening
I think I remember an old adage from long ago,
can't remember where I heard it or who said it,
maybe somebody here can help with the source
but it went something like this:
If a man won't change his ideals with words
then you change his mind with a bullet
maybe dialogue from a movie
"go tell the spartans" comes to mind
but can't be sure
Call me crazy...but that sounds like a direct threat of violence towards "DC".
In my opinion...the report was nice to boondock...they could of taken this quote from the very same thread on page 2.
there are also some who post here that would just love
to throw a brick thru a window, or show up in DC and protest
but do not have the physical capabilities to do so. Some even sit
in wheelchairs or use crutches to get around and/or totally
disabled. Those folks rely solely on somebody else to do their
bidding for them. Sitting behind a screen and stating their
minds is the ONLY recourse those folks have. But they would
be in the fringe if they could. How else is their voice gonna
be heard??? Their mind still works even if their bodies do not.
So tread very lightly when even considering calling those type
folks cowards. For some, it was valor in war that put them in those
That clearly says to me that he would like to go throw some bricks through a window in DC.
Hammer and Sickle...same story...not going to post because they quotes are exactly the same...they didn't modify it or take it out of context in
That ONE thread has many more examples...I would say ATS is lucky on the ones they selected and that they didn't go into other more violent threads
here on ATS.
Here are some more examples from that same thread....I'll withhold the members name so I'm not hit with the T&C and get this whole post deleted.
Page 2, basically justifying the threats of violence:
If the Democrat representatives are so upset about these threats then why did they vote for a bill that they knew 2/3rds of Americans were
against? I mean duh, are they really that stupid?
Page 2, more support for violence.
They should be afraid - VERY afraid! What they did was not only stupid, it was suicide - and not just the political variety either. You cannot
continually violate the will of the electorate and expect pleasant results. For a decade now, this government has pissed all over us and tried to tell
us it only rain. We know better, now we're pissed off about being pissed on!
Page 3, more support
Serves them crooked potitical ass clowns right if they receive Violent Backlash, they are supposed to represent US citizens that elected them
to their jobs and they are totally blocking out what the people are saying.
On page 4 of that thread, dissapointment in the low number of threats and the nostalgia of the past when you could hang politicians:
We have ~315 Million people in America.
65%-75% of them don't want the bill/law.
That's appx. 204-236 Million people.
They get ~10 threats.
Only one action. If you can even consider cutting a line on propane tank outside as nothing more than something a broken hearted punk kid could
achieve at some girls home for dissing him.
OK... Waste some more time and tax dollars protecting them?
Back in the day, congressmen would be hanged by the neck for going against the populace.
Don't do the crime if you can't do the time. Shut Up Cry Baby ... my favorite catch phrase for thin skinned cowardly types.
Page 4, make your own judgement
The tree of liberty must be watered from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.
Page 9, if this isn't support of violence...I'm not sure what is
Good. I say kill em all and let God sort em out. We use to say "Kill a commie for mommy."
These sell-out fascist whores turning the government into a corporation with the power to enforce a penal code against customers wo refuse to buy
their products or parents who refuse to send their children off to kill and be killed for a profit.
Bring back the guillotines. I'd love to see Pelosi's valium addled smirk sitting in the basket. Burn down the CIA. Nuke the friggin NSA.
Send all the Israelis back to their own country and let them run their own govt. No more dual citizen israelis in govenrment positions higher than dog
catcher. They just caught a coyote in Tribeca section of Manhatten. pound sand with the arabs.
There are many many more...but I think everyone gets the point. That ONE thread was filled with hate, suggestion of violence, and support of
violence. I give a lot of credit to those in that thread speaking AGAINST the violence...you would think they would get as much praise as the three
that were called out in the report...but it doesn't seem like that gets you much credit around here.
And that was a pretty MILD thread compared to others I have seen about the healthcare bill, violent revolution, immigration, ect.
I'm just really confused as to how the claim can be made that these members were "defamed" by the ADL.
Is anyone saying they didn't make these statements?
Is anyone saying that these statements weren't exact quotes copy and pasted?
I'm just really confused as to how these statements are made here on ATS, but if someone reports on it then they are wrong?
How is that logical? Violent statments are made here on ATS...someone comes here and reads the boards and decides to write an article or report that
says..."ATS has some members posting messages that are promoting violence...and here is an example *quote*". And then those here on ATS who see
these violent promoting/accepting messages everyday are SHOCKED by it???
I simply just do not understand.
I heard on ATS Live what I thought they said it has to do with them using ATS content without permission...but isn't that what happens on ATS every
single day??? Link to a blog, link to an article...we have had very long threads where the source is a discussion on another message board. They
sourced these quotes as coming from ATS...they weren't trying to rip it off...I just don't understand what the big complaint is other than it shows
ATS in a bad light...but it was all true.
One last question...what would be the basis of the lawsuit???
Ok...now I'm going to duck and cover.