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.
I believe
But I will reserve my right to call them terrorists based on my own judgement of what I saw, heard and read. I have no intention of trying to get them convicted in a court.
originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: UKTruth
I believe
And that is where we part ways.
I don't like to believe. I like to know.
But I will reserve my right to call them terrorists based on my own judgement of what I saw, heard and read. I have no intention of trying to get them convicted in a court.
You only wish to slander their names for the sake of partisan political purposes, regardless of what they have or have not been convicted of?
originally posted by: UKTruth
originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: UKTruth
I believe
And that is where we part ways.
I don't like to believe. I like to know.
But I will reserve my right to call them terrorists based on my own judgement of what I saw, heard and read. I have no intention of trying to get them convicted in a court.
You only wish to slander their names for the sake of partisan political purposes, regardless of what they have or have not been convicted of?
That's what I thought - hiding behind something unlikely (that the organisers intended a peaceful protest) in order to deny something that is very likely (that they were sent with violence on the agenda). Its funny, because when condemning Trump, 100% proof seems unimportant.
This is another progressive tactic. Hypocrisy as a weapon. Are you sure you are not a progressive?!
originally posted by: introvert
originally posted by: UKTruth
originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: UKTruth
I believe
And that is where we part ways.
I don't like to believe. I like to know.
But I will reserve my right to call them terrorists based on my own judgement of what I saw, heard and read. I have no intention of trying to get them convicted in a court.
You only wish to slander their names for the sake of partisan political purposes, regardless of what they have or have not been convicted of?
That's what I thought - hiding behind something unlikely (that the organisers intended a peaceful protest) in order to deny something that is very likely (that they were sent with violence on the agenda). Its funny, because when condemning Trump, 100% proof seems unimportant.
This is another progressive tactic. Hypocrisy as a weapon. Are you sure you are not a progressive?!
Nice try.
You have already conceded that you are "hiding behind" your own beliefs.
Like I said, you can believe anything and everything you want. Still does not make them terrorists.
originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: LesMisanthrope
No one was threatened with violence at a Trump's rally ... except for protesters when they are ludicrously outnumbered by his thuggish cronies while he's calling for them to be beaten, kicked, or taken on on a stretcher.
Your shallow attempts to invert the facts are ridiculous. And boring.
originally posted by: UKTruth
originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: LesMisanthrope
No one was threatened with violence at a Trump's rally ... except for protesters when they are ludicrously outnumbered by his thuggish cronies while he's calling for them to be beaten, kicked, or taken on on a stretcher.
Your shallow attempts to invert the facts are ridiculous. And boring.
Hilarious. Do you sell any tickets to your reality? You seem to have constructed quite an elaborate place there.
originally posted by: Gryphon66
originally posted by: UKTruth
originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: LesMisanthrope
No one was threatened with violence at a Trump's rally ... except for protesters when they are ludicrously outnumbered by his thuggish cronies while he's calling for them to be beaten, kicked, or taken on on a stretcher.
Your shallow attempts to invert the facts are ridiculous. And boring.
Hilarious. Do you sell any tickets to your reality? You seem to have constructed quite an elaborate place there.
Proof. Do you have any?
originally posted by: DonVoigt
There is going to be a lot more violence but it is going to be done by the black community, they have become increasingly violent against white people ever since Barack Obama became president,the black community seems to think that having a black president means that they can commit criminal behavior against white people and Donald Trump getting elected president means that they don't have their illusionary justification for violence against white people anymore. On top of it the word racism has no meaning or weight anymore. So when they start crying racism that a white man it's gonna be the next president it is nothing more than angst for what could have been the best thing that happened to the black community, but Barack stabbed them in the back, then they made it worse with things like the knockout game. So boo hoo for the violent racist black community.
originally posted by: UKTruth
originally posted by: Gryphon66
originally posted by: UKTruth
originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: LesMisanthrope
No one was threatened with violence at a Trump's rally ... except for protesters when they are ludicrously outnumbered by his thuggish cronies while he's calling for them to be beaten, kicked, or taken on on a stretcher.
Your shallow attempts to invert the facts are ridiculous. And boring.
Hilarious. Do you sell any tickets to your reality? You seem to have constructed quite an elaborate place there.
Proof. Do you have any?
Seriously, you mean of Trump supporters being threatened and attacked? Plenty of proof of that all through this thread including video evidence. have you been asleep since last Friday!
originally posted by: UKTruth
No, I think the FBI definition is pretty solid.
originally posted by: DonVoigt
a reply to: spiritualzombie
The same can be said about the behavior of the "demonrat" community
originally posted by: ANNED
Will it show the american people how far out the left wing democrats will go to try to win.
originally posted by: Gryphon66
originally posted by: UKTruth
originally posted by: Gryphon66
originally posted by: UKTruth
originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: LesMisanthrope
No one was threatened with violence at a Trump's rally ... except for protesters when they are ludicrously outnumbered by his thuggish cronies while he's calling for them to be beaten, kicked, or taken on on a stretcher.
Your shallow attempts to invert the facts are ridiculous. And boring.
Hilarious. Do you sell any tickets to your reality? You seem to have constructed quite an elaborate place there.
Proof. Do you have any?
Seriously, you mean of Trump supporters being threatened and attacked? Plenty of proof of that all through this thread including video evidence. have you been asleep since last Friday!
I'm aware of the false narrative. What we see in videos however, is simply that both sides were upset by Trump's cowardly cancellation. Most of us see people throwing punches at each other, yelling at each other, etc. etc. but in the minds of the faithful, like you apparently, there is only one side being assaulted, only one side being victimized.
Like typical bullies, Trump supporters don't want to "send protesters out on stretchers" unless they have a 1000 to one numerical advantage.
Video evidence? Like what? You mean the poor cop walking through with a bloody head after he was hit by a bottle? So, you know who threw that bottle then? I'm certain Chicago PD would like to know.
Trump's hateful rhetoric has created the situation. I don't approve of folks who decided to go in and disrupt the speech, but I do understand it. They stood up to thugs and bullies ... and the bullies and thugs, as they all do, starting whining about being victimized.
There were only five arrests ... and one of those was of a CBS reporter who was simply doing his job.
Trump cancelled without even letting Chicago PD know. His team (probably intentionally) CREATED this situation, and they were all ready to go with trying desperately to reverse the "fascist" narrative.
originally posted by: UKTruth
originally posted by: Gryphon66
originally posted by: UKTruth
originally posted by: Gryphon66
originally posted by: UKTruth
originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: LesMisanthrope
No one was threatened with violence at a Trump's rally ... except for protesters when they are ludicrously outnumbered by his thuggish cronies while he's calling for them to be beaten, kicked, or taken on on a stretcher.
Your shallow attempts to invert the facts are ridiculous. And boring.
Hilarious. Do you sell any tickets to your reality? You seem to have constructed quite an elaborate place there.
Proof. Do you have any?
Seriously, you mean of Trump supporters being threatened and attacked? Plenty of proof of that all through this thread including video evidence. have you been asleep since last Friday!
I'm aware of the false narrative. What we see in videos however, is simply that both sides were upset by Trump's cowardly cancellation. Most of us see people throwing punches at each other, yelling at each other, etc. etc. but in the minds of the faithful, like you apparently, there is only one side being assaulted, only one side being victimized.
Like typical bullies, Trump supporters don't want to "send protesters out on stretchers" unless they have a 1000 to one numerical advantage.
Video evidence? Like what? You mean the poor cop walking through with a bloody head after he was hit by a bottle? So, you know who threw that bottle then? I'm certain Chicago PD would like to know.
Trump's hateful rhetoric has created the situation. I don't approve of folks who decided to go in and disrupt the speech, but I do understand it. They stood up to thugs and bullies ... and the bullies and thugs, as they all do, starting whining about being victimized.
There were only five arrests ... and one of those was of a CBS reporter who was simply doing his job.
Trump cancelled without even letting Chicago PD know. His team (probably intentionally) CREATED this situation, and they were all ready to go with trying desperately to reverse the "fascist" narrative.
Hmm, biased rubbish in my view.
We're not going to see eye to eye on this one.