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.

 

Rand Paul ABDUCTED Female Student While In College, Tried To Force Her To

page: 4
6
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 12:33 PM
link   
I am really amazed every day I look at this site and read all the junk news that ATS members bring here.
I have to continually remind myself this is a conspiracy site and most of the
news is empty calories




posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 12:42 PM
link   
The woman who accused Rand Paul of this has retracted her statement, yet GQ has not. Alex Jones today was pushing Rand to sue GQ for slander/def. I dont think anyone with half a brain believes these accusations, and knows now that the mainstream media/Obama voters and psycho leftists are using all kinds of dirty tricks to keep power, and funny thing is they haven't done anything but cause more problems. I voted for Ron Paul. Im up for ending the tyranny in America, and soiling the names or arresting for crimes of globalist liars in government now.



posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 01:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lil Drummerboy
I am really amazed every day I look at this site and read all the junk news that ATS members bring here.
I have to continually remind myself this is a conspiracy site and most of the
news is empty calories


But you took the time to post in this thread, bumping it back to the top and contributing to my points only encouraging more of it.

The way I see it is this. Ron Paul is like some demi-god on ATS for some reason. He has a son that wants to be a doctor so badly that he just decides he is a doctor. Then this man, Rand is running for office. An old college chum gives an interview about some college hijinks using words that easily translated into something far more nefarious sounding in print. Rand refused to deny it happened. Rand claimed he was seeking legal options but not to sue for defamation or libel. Then finally he is going to sue but still not for defamation or libel, he is not sure what yet. He is given more opportunities to clear it up and refuses to deny it. The woman "clarifies" the story and says she did not mean "kidnap" as in forcefully taking her. Then the woman takes the story back altogether.

Sorry it is not "I am an alien" or "Prediction 100% Something something" or yet another "9/11 FINALLY PROOF" thread.



posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 01:43 PM
link   
Excuse the name calling, mods. I guess we'll see if it's foul enough to be censored...

If you're going to make accusations of someone kidnaping you, and thereby ruin their reputation, you pathetic BITCH, then you damn well better do it without the comfort of anonymity! You are a coward.

And, as already mentioned, this is a pro-Obama site.


Sorry for the not-so-dignified reply, y'all. I should be above mere insults, but... I'm not.

Because this really pisses me off - some retarded idiot telling some newspaper she was raped, kidnaped, hit, harrassed, stalked, whathaveyou, by Person X, who just happens to be a political opponent to the person supported by the newspaper - and then she doesn't even have the guts to reveal her own name. In the words of David Icke; it's PATHETIC!



posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 01:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by David_Reale
And, as already mentioned, this is a pro-Obama site.


This thread has what to do with Obama?


Sorry for the not-so-dignified reply, y'all. I should be above mere insults, but... I'm not.

Because this really pisses me off - some retarded idiot telling some newspaper she was raped, kidnaped, hit, harrassed, stalked, whathaveyou, by Person X, who just happens to be a political opponent to the person supported by the newspaper - and then she doesn't even have the guts to reveal her own name. In the words of David Icke; it's PATHETIC!


Yeah, you obviously did not read the article because no one said anything about rape, hitting, harassing, or stalking.



posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 02:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Adevoc Satanae

Originally posted by Lil Drummerboy
I am really amazed every day I look at this site and read all the junk news that ATS members bring here.
I have to continually remind myself this is a conspiracy site and most of the
news is empty calories


But you took the time to post in this thread, bumping it back to the top and contributing to my points only encouraging more of it.

The way I see it is this. Ron Paul is like some demi-god on ATS for some reason. He has a son that wants to be a doctor so badly that he just decides he is a doctor. Then this man, Rand is running for office. An old college chum gives an interview about some college hijinks using words that easily translated into something far more nefarious sounding in print. Rand refused to deny it happened. Rand claimed he was seeking legal options but not to sue for defamation or libel. Then finally he is going to sue but still not for defamation or libel, he is not sure what yet. He is given more opportunities to clear it up and refuses to deny it. The woman "clarifies" the story and says she did not mean "kidnap" as in forcefully taking her. Then the woman takes the story back altogether.

Sorry it is not "I am an alien" or "Prediction 100% Something something" or yet another "9/11 FINALLY PROOF" thread.
Yes that was exactly what I wanted to do was bump your thread,.. thats it

[edit on 13-8-2010 by Lil Drummerboy]



posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 02:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lil Drummerboy
So whats the name Rand or Ron?


To repeat my last post to you

The way I see it is this. Ron Paul is like some demi-god on ATS for some reason. He has a son that wants to be a doctor so badly that he just decides he is a doctor. Then this man, Rand is running for office.



posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 02:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Adevoc Satanae
 


Obviously, I was speaking in general terms in this case. Not about this specific case. Obviously, you can't read between the lines.



posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 02:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by David_Reale
reply to post by Adevoc Satanae
 


Obviously, I was speaking in general terms in this case.


Then why bring up physical abuse, stalking and rape in this thread? What does it have to do with this thread in general?

Not about this specific case. Obviously, you can't read between the lines.

Obviously you do not know how to stay on topic then.



posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 02:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Adevoc Satanae
 


Obviously, the topic here is about someone who accuses Rand Paul of doing something, and accuses him of it under the safety of anonymity. And obviously, I'm saying that accusing somebody of any of those things I mentioned, including the kidnaping in question, under the safety of anonymity, is cowardly, weak, and disgusting.

But yes, I did sort of just sweep them along in the example I made, no doubt a result of my anger. So, my bad. Sorry.



posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 02:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by David_Reale
reply to post by Adevoc Satanae
 


Obviously, the topic here is about someone who accuses Rand Paul of doing something, and accuses him of it under the safety of anonymity.


You mean this woman -""They didn't force me, they didn't make me. They were creating this drama: 'We're messing with you,'" she told the newspaper. "I went along because they were my friends. ... There was an implicit degree of cooperation in the whole thing. I felt like I was being hazed."

Obviously your problem is with the GQ reporter and not the woman. Like many other people that read the story, I got the impression she was a friend relating a crazy night she took part in. Turns out that is exactly what she was saying. Here you are bashing her and talking about rape?


And obviously, I'm saying that accusing somebody of any of those things I mentioned, including the kidnaping in question, under the safety of anonymity, is cowardly, weak, and disgusting.


Right but none of those things happened and none of those things were said.


But yes, I did sort of just sweep them along in the example I made, no doubt a result of my anger. So, my bad. Sorry.


If a story like this about fake doctor Rand Paul gets you this angry then might I suggest another hobby?



posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 03:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Adevoc Satanae
 


I mentioned rape a bit carelessly, sure, but I'm not talking about rape in regard to that woman. So don't make it sound like that's what I'm doing. Thank you.

The fact is, I always have a problem with people who run around and smear others under anonymity, whether it's in regard to supposed rape, sexual harrasments, or, as in the case of this article's misleading "kidnaping" headline. It reminds me of another thread not too far back, here on ATS, where some anonymous retard in a photo shop gave away a father as a pedophile (to the police) just because he had some pics of his children bathing nude on their camping vacation. It's the same thing there - accusing someone of doing something, and not having the guts to stand for it. I hate that kind of thing.

But obviously, in this case, yes, my problem would lie with the journalist, not the chick. My bad, once more.

But my hobbies are really none of your business.


Ok! Now that we got that cleared up, I'm out of here. No need to drag this out any further. Tata, cheerio, toodles, you.



posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 03:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by David_Reale
reply to post by Adevoc Satanae
 


I mentioned rape a bit carelessly, sure, but I'm not talking about rape in regard to that woman. So don't make it sound like that's what I'm doing. Thank you.


You mentioned raped, hit, harassed, and stalked all in this thread about this woman and this story. Sorry if I am not so concerned with the fantasy accusations that bother you. I do not like it when people pick on people for having a big nose or clubbed feet but hey, this thread is not about that is it?


The fact is, I always have a problem with people who run around and smear others under anonymity, whether it's in regard to supposed rape, sexual harrasments, or, as in the case of this article's misleading "kidnaping" headline. It reminds me of another thread not too far back, here on ATS, where some anonymous retard in a photo shop gave away a father as a pedophile (to the police) just because he had some pics of his children bathing nude on their camping vacation. It's the same thing there - accusing someone of doing something, and not having the guts to stand for it. I hate that kind of thing.


No, it actually is not. Read the woman's statements. She was never trying to accuse or smear anyone of anything. Maybe GQ was but not her. You seem to be averse to reading the things she actually did say.


But obviously, in this case, yes, my problem would lie with the journalist, not the chick. My bad, once more.


The chick you called a bitch and went off about rape, beatings, etc. about?


But my hobbies are really none of your business.


I did not ask.



posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 04:57 PM
link   
Whoever at ATS is declaring threads a hoax should review the definition of what a hoax is vs a story that was fabricated, embellished and needs to be retracted for its obvious lies and misinformation about Rand Paul.

The source articles may be politically motivated, but that still does not mean that a hoax should be allowed to run while other threads are hoaxed that have more going for them than this Rand Paul thread.

While I realize that a judgment call is a subjective matter, when it comes to declaring a thread a hoax, there should be some measure of proof before declaring a thread a hoax. If a story is allowed to run when it clearly is a hoax then I for one wonder what ATS is trying to say.

On the other hand, ATS is declaring threads about secret technology used in 911 as being a hoax and yet the Rand Paul article is maintained as if no one wants to acknowledge what the rest of the nation already knows about this article and the facts of the story.

Oh well, I pretty sure I am talking to myself, but this Rand Paul thread is not truthful and if ATS wont acknowledge what the rest of the nation already knows, then it paints ATS as something that makes me wonder if the ATS decider over what is a hoax or not is really a Democratic comrade following orders from their masters on high. OH well, like I said, I know I'm probably wasting my time, but this Rand Paul story is a discredit to a good man and if ATS does not seek fair and objective labeling of the term hoax, then it sets a really bad precedent for everything that will follow.



posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 05:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by MaxBlack
On the other hand, ATS is declaring threads about secret technology used in 911 as being a hoax and yet the Rand Paul article is maintained as if no one wants to acknowledge what the rest of the nation already knows about this article and the facts of the story.


Really comparing this thread to one about super weapons and 9/11? It has barely been a week and this story has morphed and changed but has certainly not reached the level of a hoax yet. The article is real. The fact that the story has had to change about 5 times before it became a non-story is real. Rand Paul is just as worthy of discussion as Michelle Obama but we have hoax threads claiming she took 40 friends to Spain. Where is the outcry? How about threads just whining that Muslims are building mosques where people do not want them?

Sorry if you did not find this interesting but I did. If you think it is a HOAX then perhaps we need to discuss the definition of a HOAX. If you think the problem is that it is given more import than a story about space beams on 9/11 then I think out discussion is done.



posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 05:06 PM
link   
For the record, I actually wanted to include "allegedly" or something along those lines in the title but such as I had to quote the actual title of the article as it was, I could not.



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join