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.
originally posted by: Another_Nut
a reply to: GENERAL EYES
and yes i know all the arguments but , for now, our universe seems very empty.
originally posted by: bastion
a reply to: Vermilion
Blmey; just when thought the situation couldn't get any more extremist/crazier.
What does the 'Jane's revege' comment refer too? I'm not from the US and struggling to work out if they're an evangelical/anti-abortion terror group or possibly some allusion to 'Jane Doe'.
originally posted by: bastion
a reply to: Vermilion
Cheers for the info, hadn't heard of them before.
I'm inclined to think such a group would be more likely to bomb/target the supremecourt or more specifically the judge who cited scripture as this guy seems to be disagreeing with their ruling and saying no one will be prosecuted under the ruling but such terror groups don''t act logically so they could well be responsible.
originally posted by: Vermilion
originally posted by: bastion
a reply to: Vermilion
Cheers for the info, hadn't heard of them before.
I'm inclined to think such a group would be more likely to bomb/target the supremecourt or more specifically the judge who cited scripture as this guy seems to be disagreeing with their ruling and saying no one will be prosecuted under the ruling but such terror groups don''t act logically so they could well be responsible.
You’re inclined are you?
From your post it seems it’s wishfully thinking on your part.
originally posted by: bastion
originally posted by: Vermilion
originally posted by: bastion
a reply to: Vermilion
Cheers for the info, hadn't heard of them before.
I'm inclined to think such a group would be more likely to bomb/target the supremecourt or more specifically the judge who cited scripture as this guy seems to be disagreeing with their ruling and saying no one will be prosecuted under the ruling but such terror groups don''t act logically so they could well be responsible.
You’re inclined are you?
From your post it seems it’s wishfully thinking on your part.
I'm on the fence and just brainstorming ideas and making plenty of assumptions - I don't hold any weight behnd my 'hypothesis' as there's too many unknowns but still think they''re interesting to discuss.
I can certainly see why you think Janes revenge could be behind it as terrorism is their M.O (apparently they have a blog claiming attacks on an alt-left blog but I can't find the actual blog) but it could also be completely unrelated to his announcement he wouldn't prosecute anyone involved in IVF.
Has their any announcement on the complexity of the explosive device? It was found less than 24 hours after his ruling on IVF which seems a very tight time frame to build and place any type of complex bomb is the motive was related to his ruling.
originally posted by: Another_Nut
a reply to: GENERAL EYES
And that is the kind of thought that allows deluded fools to kill people under the guise of "reproductive rights"
good thing
originally posted by: Another_Nut
a reply to: GENERAL EYES
Maybe i misunderstood...
Why would you think an empty universe would, perhaps, be a
good thing
?