Boston is a Farce to Take your Rights Away

page: 3
121
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 19 2013 @ 09:19 AM
link   
reply to post by muzzleflash
 


I'm confused by your message - are you bemoaning the MSM, the gov't/police, or both? The MSM is what it is, for better or for worse, but the response by police and the gov't seems appropriate given the circumstances. How should they be responding?




posted on Apr, 19 2013 @ 09:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by muzzleflash

Originally posted by cavscout11cav

Anything military grade.


I carried a 9 mm pistol at one time in the army. I guess that is military grade....Disarm all the cops


So you are lying outright?

You know the difference between civilian and military grade weaponry.

Is making up garbage insults to argue all you got?


What am I lying outright about. Military grade means equipment that has passed rigorous testing to be usable in a combat environment. And yes, I did carry a 9mm beretta if thats what you say I am lying about

And yes, they have military grade oakly sunglasses



posted on Apr, 19 2013 @ 09:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by cavscout11cav

Originally posted by muzzleflash

Originally posted by cavscout11cav


P.S. just because you post 4 times for everyone else 1 post does not make this a popular thread
edit on 19-4-2013 by cavscout11cav because: typos


Popularity is meaningless.

The truth is where it's all at.

I don't care if I sit and talk to myself, I prefer hearing reality rather than live in complete fantasy based TV generated fiction.

The lines are drawn, you there with your TV and belief system.
And me here rejecting it as foolhardy and shortsighted. Tisk Tisk.


Funny thats the only thing from that post you decide to answer. I am reading thru all your posts on ATS. Everything I have read so far is Anti-government. You can say I am delusional by watching TV. Im not insulted. I have seen more in my life then you can imagine. I have my beliefs, you have yours. Im not saying yours are wrong,but dont insult me just because I can see that bad things happen in the world and sometimes the government has the hand in the cookie jar, and others its just a bad event. I believe in cold hard evidence, not beliefs. Beliefs get you killed.

BTW, please send me a link for pictures of those 200+ people killed in Katrina
edit on 19-4-2013 by cavscout11cav because: (no reason given)


You stated "I have my beliefs, you have yours", and then stated "I believe in cold hard evidence, not beliefs."

How can we even talk to each other about anything if you contradict yourself constantly and continually rely on insults rather than actual political based arguments on the theory of government and the theory of human rights?

So you believe that you do not believe?
Or is it that you do not believe that you believe?



posted on Apr, 19 2013 @ 09:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by muzzleflash


They are wearing military gear, have military grade weaponry, and have armored vehicles with air support.
That's the Military operating as if they were Police in the USA, and that's prohibited according to our founding principles.



edit on 19-4-2013 by muzzleflash because: (no reason given)


While it may not be the main topic of your post it is still in it. You say we are in a police state. You specifically cite that the police are wearing military gear and using military weaponry which you are against. You said your specifically against the police using military grade weaponry, yet when I ask you what they are using that you consider military grade you don't answer.

Like I said I agree with many of your sentinments. I just want to figure out what gear you believe the police are using that they shouldn't be.

It is your thread though and if you don't want to answer I will kindly leave.
edit on 19-4-2013 by TorqueyThePig because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 19 2013 @ 09:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by redtic
reply to post by muzzleflash
 


I'm confused by your message - are you bemoaning the MSM, the gov't/police, or both? The MSM is what it is, for better or for worse, but the response by police and the gov't seems appropriate given the circumstances. How should they be responding?


I will respond with a better question.

Do you believe the govt/media should hype and sensationalize terrorism, thereby giving it a platform to promote itself from?

Or do you believe that by treating it more similarly to other stories, and minimalizing it's social impact potentials, and thereby removing any platform terrorists can promote from, is a better strategy?



posted on Apr, 19 2013 @ 09:26 AM
link   
Its funny, you dont really talk about anything, other than insulting people complaining about being insulted.

Yes I have my beliefs. My belief that evidence should be scrutinized and a decision made. I do not follow beliefs such as, I believe this boston event is a farce when you have not provided one source of evidence. Should you provide me some evidence, I can be swayed. I have been wrong before, and will be wrong in the future.

You are anti government, I get it, they can do no right. Others have died acting on that belief, hence my comment beliefs will get you killed
edit on 19-4-2013 by cavscout11cav because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 19 2013 @ 09:27 AM
link   
reply to post by TorqueyThePig
 


Ok, the phraseology "Military Gear", "Ordinance", or "Weaponry" is highly subjective in nature and is not connotative of any hard specifics.

The actual legal definitions to those words differ from state to state, nation to nation.

So which state's definitions are we arguing today?
And since these are subjective terms, we can argue all day and night and never get anywhere.

It's probably better to not really waste time over something that is based entirely on opinion and geographic factors.



posted on Apr, 19 2013 @ 09:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by cavscout11cav
Its funny, you dont really talk about anything, other than insulting people complaining about being insulted.

Yes I have my beliefs. My belief that evidence should be scrutinized and a decision made. I do not follow beliefs such as, I believe this boston event is a farce when you have not provided one source of evidence. Should you provide me some evidence, I can be swayed. I have been wrong before, and will be wrong in the future.

You are anti government, I get it, they can do no wrong. Others have died acting on that belief, hence my comment beliefs will get you killed


I provided sound philosophic reasoning, something you won't get from any news mouthpiece.

Sound philosophy is even more powerful than physical evidence because it can reveal it as fake, or find out the evidence was misinterpreted somehow.



posted on Apr, 19 2013 @ 09:30 AM
link   


Whatever happens with this terrorism:
1) NEVER give up your Liberties
2) NEVER agree to go to war over it
3) SPEAK OUT against the fascists and totalitarian/authoritarian agenda.





posted on Apr, 19 2013 @ 09:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by muzzleflash
reply to post by TorqueyThePig
 


Ok, the phraseology "Military Gear", "Ordinance", or "Weaponry" is highly subjective in nature and is not connotative of any hard specifics.

The actual legal definitions to those words differ from state to state, nation to nation.

So which state's definitions are we arguing today?
And since these are subjective terms, we can argue all day and night and never get anywhere.

It's probably better to not really waste time over something that is based entirely on opinion and geographic factors.

Ok so, what is your opinion on equipment, I will list and you say yes or no if it is military grade

tactical radios
body armor
mp 5 sub machine gun
M-4 5.56 mm rifle
shotguns
armored vehicles of non-military nature (swat)
armored humvees
flash bangs
tear gas
9mm pistol
45 cal pistol



posted on Apr, 19 2013 @ 09:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by cavscout11cav

You are anti government, I get it, they can do no right. Others have died acting on that belief, hence my comment beliefs will get you killed
edit on 19-4-2013 by cavscout11cav because: (no reason given)


Actually historically speaking, the facts are that the vast majority of all "untimely deaths" were results of government actions.

Beliefs in government get soldiers and innocent bystanders killed at a higher rate than by natural causation.
edit on 19-4-2013 by muzzleflash because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 19 2013 @ 09:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by muzzleflash

Originally posted by cavscout11cav
Its funny, you dont really talk about anything, other than insulting people complaining about being insulted.

Yes I have my beliefs. My belief that evidence should be scrutinized and a decision made. I do not follow beliefs such as, I believe this boston event is a farce when you have not provided one source of evidence. Should you provide me some evidence, I can be swayed. I have been wrong before, and will be wrong in the future.

You are anti government, I get it, they can do no wrong. Others have died acting on that belief, hence my comment beliefs will get you killed


I provided sound philosophic reasoning, something you won't get from any news mouthpiece.

Sound philosophy is even more powerful than physical evidence because it can reveal it as fake, or find out the evidence was misinterpreted somehow.


Who determines if it is sound philosophy. The Nazi's believed they had a sound philosophy. They even got their own people to follow that line of thinking



posted on Apr, 19 2013 @ 09:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by muzzleflash

Originally posted by redtic
reply to post by muzzleflash
 


I'm confused by your message - are you bemoaning the MSM, the gov't/police, or both? The MSM is what it is, for better or for worse, but the response by police and the gov't seems appropriate given the circumstances. How should they be responding?


I will respond with a better question.

Do you believe the govt/media should hype and sensationalize terrorism, thereby giving it a platform to promote itself from?

Or do you believe that by treating it more similarly to other stories, and minimalizing it's social impact potentials, and thereby removing any platform terrorists can promote from, is a better strategy?


I believe the MSM definitely hypes most of its stories - they shouldn't, but they do. And I believe that the gov't has a duty to protect its citizens and react to exceptional circumstances with exceptional response. Are you suggesting that the MSM is in cahoots with the gov't and the gov't response to this situation is a "show" for the MSM to "put on"? No, of course not - that'd be ridiculous - what's going on is that the gov't is responding to an exceptional circumstance and the MSM is covering that response. The integrity of the MSM is what's debatable (see NY Post, CNN, etc).



posted on Apr, 19 2013 @ 09:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by cavscout11cav

Originally posted by muzzleflash
reply to post by TorqueyThePig
 


Ok, the phraseology "Military Gear", "Ordinance", or "Weaponry" is highly subjective in nature and is not connotative of any hard specifics.

The actual legal definitions to those words differ from state to state, nation to nation.

So which state's definitions are we arguing today?
And since these are subjective terms, we can argue all day and night and never get anywhere.

It's probably better to not really waste time over something that is based entirely on opinion and geographic factors.

Ok so, what is your opinion on equipment, I will list and you say yes or no if it is military grade

tactical radios
body armor
mp 5 sub machine gun
M-4 5.56 mm rifle
shotguns
armored vehicles of non-military nature (swat)
armored humvees
flash bangs
tear gas
9mm pistol
45 cal pistol


Not the point of the discussion.
My opinions on your list of items has little to do with the issue here.

The issue here is the ideas the people who control our cities with guns have in their heads.
They need to change those ideas first. That's what we really need to work on.

Once the ideas change, than the appearance and tactics of their organizations will also change as a result.



posted on Apr, 19 2013 @ 09:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by redtic

Originally posted by muzzleflash

Originally posted by redtic
reply to post by muzzleflash
 


I'm confused by your message - are you bemoaning the MSM, the gov't/police, or both? The MSM is what it is, for better or for worse, but the response by police and the gov't seems appropriate given the circumstances. How should they be responding?


I will respond with a better question.

Do you believe the govt/media should hype and sensationalize terrorism, thereby giving it a platform to promote itself from?

Or do you believe that by treating it more similarly to other stories, and minimalizing it's social impact potentials, and thereby removing any platform terrorists can promote from, is a better strategy?


I believe the MSM definitely hypes most of its stories - they shouldn't, but they do. And I believe that the gov't has a duty to protect its citizens and react to exceptional circumstances with exceptional response. Are you suggesting that the MSM is in cahoots with the gov't and the gov't response to this situation is a "show" for the MSM to "put on"? No, of course not - that'd be ridiculous - what's going on is that the gov't is responding to an exceptional circumstance and the MSM is covering that response. The integrity of the MSM is what's debatable (see NY Post, CNN, etc).


That's not the point.

The point is that with the way things are now, anyone can become a world famous terrorist in what two hours or less? Anyone can do it, its extremely easy with this automatic ultra-hyped publicity paradigm.

Do we really want it to stay like this?



posted on Apr, 19 2013 @ 09:37 AM
link   
reply to post by cavscout11cav
 


I guess I will just start carrying a revolver at work and substitute my semi auto AR 15 for a remington 870. Who cares if criminals have better weaponry.



posted on Apr, 19 2013 @ 09:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Telos


Whatever happens with this terrorism:
1) NEVER give up your Liberties
2) NEVER agree to go to war over it
3) SPEAK OUT against the fascists and totalitarian/authoritarian agenda.





Ding ding ding!

Show me your papers!!



posted on Apr, 19 2013 @ 09:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by TorqueyThePig
reply to post by cavscout11cav
 


I guess I will just start carrying a revolver at work and substitute my semi auto AR 15 for a remington 870. Who cares if criminals have better weaponry.


I the innocent citizen, am more worried about how you think everyone is a criminal, and point those guns at us and don't care at all how we feel.

I am most interested in disarming your pro-violence solution to problems in life.



posted on Apr, 19 2013 @ 09:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by muzzleflash
They are wearing military gear, have military grade weaponry, and have armored vehicles with air support.
That's the Military operating as if they were Police in the USA, and that's prohibited according to our founding principles.

I don't care that your paper says you are a cop, your gear and weapons say you are a totalitarian military man here to squash my nation and it's liberty. Sadly you officers fail to realize this most simple fact.



Actually your opinion does matter, you state that even though they say they're are cops, they are acting in as a military which is forbidden in the constitution. You did not say how they are acting, you say the gear and weapons make them the totalitarian man. You say they are here to squash OUR nation, and its liberty.
edit on 19-4-2013 by cavscout11cav because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 19 2013 @ 09:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by muzzleflash

I provided sound philosophic reasoning, something you won't get from any news mouthpiece.

Sound philosophy is even more powerful than physical evidence because it can reveal it as fake, or find out the evidence was misinterpreted somehow.


Sound philosophic reasoning, huh?

I'm looking for your Truth Table (logic) but can't seem to find it....





new topics

top topics



 
121
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join