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.
The arrests were made for alleged possession of an offensive weapon, criminal damage, assault on a police officer, failure to remove a face covering, and possession of articles with intent to commit criminal damage.
One man was tackled by police as he tried to jump from the roof of the building saying "I don't want to live in a fascist state", reported the BBC's Mike Sergeant.
Originally posted by Briles1207
I am more angry that the OP is stating that people who arent bothered by this as it is not affecting their lives, are somehow moronic.
Originally posted by Bluesma
I made no claim of victimization (I do not believe in victimization), both you and the other poster tried to turn this into a personal slant and it didn't work- let's stay on topic.
Originally posted by Bluesma
Oh stop the childish attempts at painting the woman as "emotional". That is a useless tactic in debate, and cowardly. I never claimed it was about me, and did not feel it was.
Originally posted by Daedalus
for the record, i am by no means wealthy, or privileged...i'm in less peril than most, because i know how to pay attention to my surroundings, and don't put my entire life out there on the net, for all to see..
now then..
Originally posted by Bluesma
I made no claim of victimization (I do not believe in victimization), both you and the other poster tried to turn this into a personal slant and it didn't work- let's stay on topic.
On page 8 you said:
Originally posted by Bluesma
Oh stop the childish attempts at painting the woman as "emotional". That is a useless tactic in debate, and cowardly. I never claimed it was about me, and did not feel it was.
That sounds like a claim of personal victimization to me..
If you can't be honest, i can't continue this conversation..
good day to you, ma'am.
Originally posted by Bluesma
Originally posted by Daedalus
for the record, i am by no means wealthy, or privileged...i'm in less peril than most, because i know how to pay attention to my surroundings, and don't put my entire life out there on the net, for all to see..
now then..
Originally posted by Bluesma
I made no claim of victimization (I do not believe in victimization), both you and the other poster tried to turn this into a personal slant and it didn't work- let's stay on topic.
On page 8 you said:
Originally posted by Bluesma
Oh stop the childish attempts at painting the woman as "emotional". That is a useless tactic in debate, and cowardly. I never claimed it was about me, and did not feel it was.
That sounds like a claim of personal victimization to me..
If you can't be honest, i can't continue this conversation..
good day to you, ma'am.
LOL! Then you have mistaken a claim of being victimized with a claim that one is diverting attention away from the debate at hand when they haven't a response to an argument! (using ad hominem)
In your misrepresenting my position as being okay with "anyone, anytime, anywhere" transgressing my privacy, that was also a diversion tactic, known as a "straw man".
It is amazing how many different ways a person can try to avoid responding to an argument and being response-able!
edit on 12-6-2013 by Bluesma because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Bluesma
Originally posted by Daedalus
for the record, i am by no means wealthy, or privileged...i'm in less peril than most, because i know how to pay attention to my surroundings, and don't put my entire life out there on the net, for all to see..
now then..
Originally posted by Bluesma
I made no claim of victimization (I do not believe in victimization), both you and the other poster tried to turn this into a personal slant and it didn't work- let's stay on topic.
On page 8 you said:
Originally posted by Bluesma
Oh stop the childish attempts at painting the woman as "emotional". That is a useless tactic in debate, and cowardly. I never claimed it was about me, and did not feel it was.
That sounds like a claim of personal victimization to me..
If you can't be honest, i can't continue this conversation..
good day to you, ma'am.
LOL! Then you have mistaken a claim of being victimized with a claim that one is diverting attention away from the debate at hand when they haven't a response to an argument! (using ad hominem)
In your misrepresenting my position as being okay with "anyone, anytime, anywhere" transgressing my privacy, that was also a diversion tactic, known as a "straw man".
It is amazing how many different ways a person can try to avoid responding to an argument and being response-able!
edit on 12-6-2013 by Bluesma because: (no reason given)
On the 80th anniversary of Adolf Hitler’s rise to power, Chancellor Angela Merkel urged Germans to always fight for their principles and not fall into the complacency that enabled the Nazi dictator to seize control. Speaking Wednesday at the opening of a new exhibit at the Topography of Terror memorial documenting Hitler’s election, Merkel noted that German academics and students at the time happily joined the Nazis only a few months later in burning books deemed subversive. “The rise of the Nazis was made possible because the elite of German society worked with them, but also, above all else, because most in Germany at least tolerated this rise,” Merkel said.
Originally posted by DeadSeraph
Seriously? The only person in this thread who has no response to the arguments presented and is resorting to diversion, is you. You don't even want to talk about the issue or defend your position. Your continued presence in the discussion revolves entirely around the fact you feel insulted or that I have insulted people who share your apathy. If you're after an apology you wont be getting one in this life or the next.