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.

 

Chris Matthews Calls for Assassination of Entire Congress

page: 1
28
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:
+5 more 
posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 02:57 AM
link   
Using the absolute infantile logic of the MSM, Moonbattery hits one into the stratosphere.

Anyway, have fun folks, I almost forgot how people died after those in the MSM lied.

Chris Matthews Calls for Assassination of Entire Congress


This is a screen grab from the opening 2 minutes of Chris Matthews Hardball Thursday night. Next to him is a picture of the U.S. Capitol building with a bullseye target on it along with gun crosshairs.


Original source-Why is Chris Matthews Displaying A Target and Crosshairs on the U.S. Capitol?




posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 03:05 AM
link   
reply to post by saltheart foamfollower
 


Applause..........



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 04:03 AM
link   
So when you bully someone on facebook and they commit suicide, it is your fault.
But when MSM puts stuff about killing the government, and people like JLL go and do it, there is no one to blame but the shooter.

hypocracy at it's finest...



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 04:15 AM
link   
Chris Mathews is Alex Jones' fault.

They will say the shooter was an AJ fan

even though the shooter will have posted AJ hate all over the net.
( like has happened with a shooter already)

The Shooter will have been a Chris Mathews fan though...
The shooter's MKU trigger being a bullseye on Congress...


+3 more 
posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 04:15 AM
link   
reply to post by saltheart foamfollower
 


It doesn't count when you're progressive. Only if you're conservative.
S+F



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 04:37 AM
link   
reply to post by ziggystrange
 


Glad to see you back ziggy.

Everyone else, thanks for the comments. The cognitive dissonance is coming to a head.



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 04:46 AM
link   
reply to post by saltheart foamfollower
 


I just remembered Sarah Palins Bullseye...

Say, there is a good way to get rid of the PTB
heh heh,
just paint their own bulls eyes on them
and post it in high traffic.



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 04:54 AM
link   
Before I go off a cliff with a bunch of lemmings, got a link to what he actually SAID or DISCUSSED to go along with the picture? I feel like I'd be going off 100% blind if I were to comment on this with so little information as provided in the OP and at the links in the OP. Got a link to the actual words that went with this picture? In context? Thanks.



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 04:57 AM
link   
reply to post by ~Lucidity
 


What does that have to do with ANYTHING?

Cognitive dissonance?

Come on, Mathews put a crosshair and a bullseye on the capital, this is a SURE SIGN THAT HE WANTS TO KILL EVERYONE.

Yes, this is hyperbole.

I hope you get it.



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 04:58 AM
link   
reply to post by ~Lucidity
 


A bullseye with "fire on the right" seems pretty self explanitory, considering the subconcious doesn't do negatives they say.



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 05:02 AM
link   
reply to post by saltheart foamfollower
 


It depends on what he was discussing when that graphic came on screen. My statement stands.

There may be cognitive dissonance here, but it's not mine.


reply to post by Danbones
 


Really? Are you assuming from a screen grab that he's ordering or suggesting that people to fire on the right?

You might want to listen and watch in context before making that decision.

www.msnbc.msn.com...

I did what the OP didn't and found the video. I'm watching now...will let you know...after I've seen for myself.

edit on 1/22/2011 by ~Lucidity because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 05:05 AM
link   
reply to post by ~Lucidity
 


NO, IT DOES NOT MATTER WHAT WAS SAID.

What was said on the Palin political targets? Any idea? What about the literature?

You saying it depends on the context means you have cognitive dissonant beliefs. How you doing with a fractured persona?



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 05:16 AM
link   
I still stand by my point that the symbols are potential triggers and there will be a diliberate attempt to link any shooters to a desired political target...It has nothing to do with the context if it is a trigger.

Like has just happened with Sarah Palins crosshairs, the shooting victims, and the botched attempt to falsly link the shooter to a political entity.



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 05:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Danbones
I still stand by my point that the symbols are potential triggers and there will be a diliberate attempt to link any shooters to a desired political target...It has nothing to do with the context if it is a trigger.

Like has just happened with Sarah Palins crosshairs, the shooting victims, and the botched attempt to falsly link the shooter to a political entity.

But any symbols can become triggers. Unicorns with rainbows could "trigger" someone. Do we ban the use of them?
Crosshairs have many interpretations, I'm not defending Mathews, he's an idiot with a progressive agenda.

It is the progressive movement that will maneuver the debate from the central core issues and focus on a specific piece of symbolism. Thus denying any import to focus on the issue.



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 05:38 AM
link   
Okay. On the show, they are discussing the in-fighting and finger pointing that is taking place on the "right," he says, "It's a circular firing squad on the right."

The term fire on the right in context appears to be that there's fire on the right.

He is not telling or ordering people to "fire on the right," as so many bloggers and some here are irresponsibly insinuating.

Furthermore, if a person's argument (and I don't know what your personal stances on this is or was) was that Sarah Palin did nothing wrong with her symbolism and words and was taken out of context and that it was wrong for some people to attempt to insinuate that she was someone to "blame" or "responsible for" the climate that is leading to escalating violence, that person might be a hypocrite to be defending her and criticizing him..

Was the graphic in entirely good taste? Maybe not, but it 1.) does not mean what you are implying and 2.) seems to me like it was a depiction of the irony of them turning fire against each other.

Oh and by the way?

The screenshot you use does not appear at all in the 10:29 segment, so can you tell me if it was maybe in the pre-commercial or mid-commercial teaser before the segment started? Or that the video started right after it appeared briefly? Or do you perhaps think it was edited out before they posted the segment on MSNBC's website? I can't seem to find it at all, unless I blinked at the same exact spot during both my viewings of the segment and also when I attempted to fast-forward through twice to find it.

Finally, assuming it was in the teaser, a graphic that appears for maybe a few seconds on a political commentary show with a 10:29 minute discussion about an entirely valid topic with an arguable poor tag line is quite different than a graphic that appeared for what? months? on a website accompanied by supporting words and rhetoric in the same vein as the cross-hairs and specific names as targets in those cross-hairs.

That's the end of my analysis. Carry on with your grasping at straws and disinformation.



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 05:46 AM
link   
Oh, and your thread headline? "Chris Matthews Calls for Assassination of Entire Congress"...

Really? Could this be libel?

Some other headlines on this subject so far....

"Chris Matthews wants his viewers to kill conservatives"
"Chris matthews [sic] telling his viewers to "fire on the right ..."

I look forward to more if this goes more viral.
edit on 1/22/2011 by ~Lucidity because: added two other headlines.



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 06:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by saltheart foamfollower
 


It doesn't count when you're progressive. Only if you're conservative.
S+F




LMAO! hahaha!



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 06:53 AM
link   
Both Keith Olberman and Chris Matthews do extremely strange things. MSNBC fired Olblahblah ... here's high hopes that they'll get rid of Matthews next. Seriously .. have you guys listened to Matthews at all? Years ago he was okay, but when Obama started running for POTUS, this guy completely lost it. He's ready to pop. IMHO



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 11:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan
Both Keith Olberman and Chris Matthews do extremely strange things. MSNBC fired Olblahblah ... here's high hopes that they'll get rid of Matthews next. Seriously .. have you guys listened to Matthews at all? Years ago he was okay, but when Obama started running for POTUS, this guy completely lost it. He's ready to pop. IMHO


And to those on the left who will also call (wish) for firing Fox News people, remember how TV networks work.

They are in the business to make a profit.

No viewers = no sponsers = easy to fire Olbermann (and maybe Matthews since he is last in the ratings).

On the other hand Fox News has millions of viewers = tons of sponsors = Fox News people aren't going anywhere.
edit on 1/22/2011 by centurion1211 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 11:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by ~Lucidity
Really? Could this be libel?



Really?

Tell Matthews to get in line behind Palin and many other Conservatives at the courthouse filing those legal complaints. Wonder if you and many other members here would/could be named in those complaints?




top topics



 
28
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join