Jump to content

Conspiracy theories


TRJ

Recommended Posts

  • 4 weeks later...

 

 

More than 1100 rounds were fired but can you or anyone else show one picture of a bullet hole anywhere?

I think you've mistaken this discussion about whether conspiracy theories should or shouldn't be allowed, as an invitation to propagate a conspiracy theory.

 

Regardless of the outcome of the original discussion, you should stay on topic within this thread.

 

The discussion was about why conspiracy theories should be allowed or not and a lot of members here said that truth exposing conspiracies is called conspiracy theory.

 

I propagated a legitimate question about lack of evidence which no one can answer. Being unable to answer it doesn't make it a conspiracy theory.

 

Thanks for setting me straight on that.

 

I moved several of your off topic posts, and some replies to them, to a new thread. You can find it here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I say no conspiracy theories. They're a generally unhelpful distraction and largely hurtful to the victims of shootings and their families. And I see no reason for ICarry to be an outlet for folks like Alex Jones to make more click money with fake news. We already have a no curse words rule, personally I think this fits right in with that. The internet has many places where people can share their favorite conspiracy theories.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I say no conspiracy theories. They're a generally unhelpful distraction and largely hurtful to the victims of shootings and their families. And I see no reason for ICarry to be an outlet for folks like Alex Jones to make more click money with fake news. We already have a no curse words rule, personally I think this fits right in with that. The internet has many places where people can share their favorite conspiracy theories.

 

Agreed. https://www.debatepolitics.com/. Is a great place which is much better suited than this forum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I say no conspiracy theories. They're a generally unhelpful distraction and largely hurtful to the victims of shootings and their families. And I see no reason for ICarry to be an outlet for folks like Alex Jones to make more click money with fake news. We already have a no curse words rule, personally I think this fits right in with that. The internet has many places where people can share their favorite conspiracy theories.

Wake up, that's a very simplistic and uninformed point of view. The internet has come under the control and censored by the same people who are slowly taking away our 1st and 2nd Amendment rights with dirty tricks and lies and propaganda. You have been conditioned by the propaganda so keep drinking the koolaid and calling it a conspiracy theory while your rights are taken away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I say no conspiracy theories. They're a generally unhelpful distraction and largely hurtful to the victims of shootings and their families. And I see no reason for ICarry to be an outlet for folks like Alex Jones to make more click money with fake news. We already have a no curse words rule, personally I think this fits right in with that. The internet has many places where people can share their favorite conspiracy theories.

Wake up, that's a very simplistic and uninformed point of view. The internet has come under the control and censored by the same people who are slowly taking away our 1st and 2nd Amendment rights with dirty tricks and lies and propaganda. You have been conditioned by the propaganda so keep drinking the koolaid and calling it a conspiracy theory while your rights are taken away.

 

 

Nah.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted · Hidden by mauserme, October 8, 2019 at 06:14 AM - No reason given
Hidden by mauserme, October 8, 2019 at 06:14 AM - No reason given

 

 

I say no conspiracy theories. They're a generally unhelpful distraction and largely hurtful to the victims of shootings and their families. And I see no reason for ICarry to be an outlet for folks like Alex Jones to make more click money with fake news. We already have a no curse words rule, personally I think this fits right in with that. The internet has many places where people can share their favorite conspiracy theories.

 

Wake up, that's a very simplistic and uninformed point of view. The internet has come under the control and censored by the same people who are slowly taking away our 1st and 2nd Amendment rights with dirty tricks and lies and propaganda. You have been conditioned by the propaganda so keep drinking the koolaid and calling it a conspiracy theory while your rights are taken away.

Nah.

I hope you're right but history and what is happening shows otherwise. It's not a theory when video footage is shown. The first video shows no bullet holes after the shooting. The second raises good questions.

 

https://youtu.be/UzvNZ8eh_-Q

 

https://153news.net/watch_video.php?v=3169BD97553A

Link to comment
More than 1100 rounds were fired but can you or anyone else show one picture of a bullet hole anywhere?
I think you've mistaken this discussion about whether conspiracy theories should or shouldn't be allowed, as an invitation to propagate a conspiracy theory. Regardless of the outcome of the original discussion, you should stay on topic within this thread.
The discussion was about why conspiracy theories should be allowed or not and a lot of members here said that truth exposing conspiracies is called conspiracy theory.I propagated a legitimate question about lack of evidence which no one can answer. Being unable to answer it doesn't make it a conspiracy theory.
Thanks for setting me straight on that.I moved several of your off topic posts, and some replies to them, to a new thread. You can find it here.

 

That's all you needed to censor it. Didn't know you had special powers and could assume people's identities. Since you don't support the 1st Amendment like the people who want to take our 2nd Amendment rights, might as well give up on the 2nd Ammendment too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's all you needed to censor it. Didn't know you had special powers and could assume people's identities. Since you don't support the 1st Amendment like the people who want to take our 2nd Amendment rights, might as well give up on the 2nd Ammendment too.

The forum software sorts by post date/time, putting the oldest post (yours) at the top. It then assigns the author of that oldest post as OP. I did make it clear in Post #30 that the thread was split from this one.

 

Of course, if you would give TRJ the respect he deserves by staying on topic in his thread, we could avoid this altogether. That topic, by the way, is whether or not we should allow posting the sort of conspiracy theories you continue to try adding to this thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

More than 1100 rounds were fired but can you or anyone else show one picture of a bullet hole anywhere?
I think you've mistaken this discussion about whether conspiracy theories should or shouldn't be allowed, as an invitation to propagate a conspiracy theory. Regardless of the outcome of the original discussion, you should stay on topic within this thread.
The discussion was about why conspiracy theories should be allowed or not and a lot of members here said that truth exposing conspiracies is called conspiracy theory.I propagated a legitimate question about lack of evidence which no one can answer. Being unable to answer it doesn't make it a conspiracy theory.
Thanks for setting me straight on that.I moved several of your off topic posts, and some replies to them, to a new thread. You can find it here.

 

That's all you needed to censor it. Didn't know you had special powers and could assume people's identities. Since you don't support the 1st Amendment like the people who want to take our 2nd Amendment rights, might as well give up on the 2nd Ammendment too.

The first amendment protects your rights from being trampled on by the government, not a private forum owned by a private individual.

 

I wish some people on our side would take the time to understand how the bill of rights works.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

More than 1100 rounds were fired but can you or anyone else show one picture of a bullet hole anywhere?
I think you've mistaken this discussion about whether conspiracy theories should or shouldn't be allowed, as an invitation to propagate a conspiracy theory. Regardless of the outcome of the original discussion, you should stay on topic within this thread.
The discussion was about why conspiracy theories should be allowed or not and a lot of members here said that truth exposing conspiracies is called conspiracy theory.I propagated a legitimate question about lack of evidence which no one can answer. Being unable to answer it doesn't make it a conspiracy theory.
Thanks for setting me straight on that.I moved several of your off topic posts, and some replies to them, to a new thread. You can find it here.
That's all you needed to censor it. Didn't know you had special powers and could assume people's identities. Since you don't support the 1st Amendment like the people who want to take our 2nd Amendment rights, might as well give up on the 2nd Ammendment too.
The first amendment protects your rights from being trampled on by the government, not a private forum owned by a private individual. I wish some people on our side would take the time to understand how the bill of rights works.

 

It's not a right if it only applies to the government. It's like saying the 2nd Amendment only applies to militias. It's a slippery slope.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

More than 1100 rounds were fired but can you or anyone else show one picture of a bullet hole anywhere?
I think you've mistaken this discussion about whether conspiracy theories should or shouldn't be allowed, as an invitation to propagate a conspiracy theory. Regardless of the outcome of the original discussion, you should stay on topic within this thread.
The discussion was about why conspiracy theories should be allowed or not and a lot of members here said that truth exposing conspiracies is called conspiracy theory.I propagated a legitimate question about lack of evidence which no one can answer. Being unable to answer it doesn't make it a conspiracy theory.
Thanks for setting me straight on that.I moved several of your off topic posts, and some replies to them, to a new thread. You can find it here.
That's all you needed to censor it. Didn't know you had special powers and could assume people's identities. Since you don't support the 1st Amendment like the people who want to take our 2nd Amendment rights, might as well give up on the 2nd Ammendment too.
The first amendment protects your rights from being trampled on by the government, not a private forum owned by a private individual. I wish some people on our side would take the time to understand how the bill of rights works.

It's not a right if it only applies to the government. It's like saying the 2nd Amendment only applies to militias. It's a slippery slope.

 

Read what you just wrote, and then read it slowly another dozen times at least :facepalm:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I wrote is clear and in response to what you wrote. You read it a dozen times since you don't understand it.

The fact is, and I'm embarrassed for you, but you don't even understand how the bill of rights works.

 

Perhaps spend some time on google and learn who the rights in the bill of rights pertains to. Whose rights are they?

 

For whatever reason you seem to believe that they are the rights of the government, or that somehow, the are also rights of the government. Kind of embarrassing to post that on a public forum.

 

A little reading comprehension may also help since you clearly didn't understand my first reply.

 

YOUR RIGHTS, 1A, 2A, ETC... the bill of rights protects those rights from the government TAKING THEM FROM YOU.

 

The bill of rights doesn't protect you from other people. Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, or heck even this forum can delete your posts, and ban you.

 

If someone came into my home spewing hateful comments to my family and I grabbed them by the collar and threw them out of my house Al Bundy style, would you be screaming about me violating their first amendment rights? Hopefully you wouldn't, because I'm not the government.

 

When you get a call from telemarketer. Do you hang up on them? Well, according to your version of the bill of rights, you're violating their first amendment rights.

 

If someone was a guest in my house and started rifling through my bills and papers, are they violating my 4th amendment rights? No, because they're not the government, they're just nosy people who will get thrown out Al Bundy style.

 

So every time someone says so and so website doesn't respect my 1A, it sounds unintelligent and ignorant because it's not the government doing it to you. This forum is like someone's home. If they don't want to hear what you have to say, they can make you leave.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

What I wrote is clear and in response to what you wrote. You read it a dozen times since you don't understand it.

 

The fact is, and I'm embarrassed for you, but you don't even understand how the bill of rights works.

 

Perhaps spend some time on google and learn who the rights in the bill of rights pertains to. Whose rights are they?

 

For whatever reason you seem to believe that they are the rights of the government, or that somehow, the are also rights of the government. Kind of embarrassing to post that on a public forum.

 

A little reading comprehension may also help since you clearly didn't understand my first reply.

 

YOUR RIGHTS, 1A, 2A, ETC... the bill of rights protects those rights from the government TAKING THEM FROM YOU.

 

The bill of rights doesn't protect you from other people. Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, or heck even this forum can delete your posts, and ban you.

 

If someone came into my home spewing hateful comments to my family and I grabbed them by the collar and threw them out of my house Al Bundy style, would you be screaming about me violating their first amendment rights? Hopefully you wouldn't, because I'm not the government.

 

When you get a call from telemarketer. Do you hang up on them? Well, according to your version of the bill of rights, you're violating their first amendment rights.

 

If someone was a guest in my house and started rifling through my bills and papers, are they violating my 4th amendment rights? No, because they're not the government, they're just nosy people who will get thrown out Al Bundy style.

 

So every time someone says so and so website doesn't respect my 1A, it sounds unintelligent and ignorant because it's not the government doing it to you. This forum is like someone's home. If they don't want to hear what you have to say, they can make you leave.

You are breaking the code of conduct with your pompous attitude and belittling comments.

 

You should be embarrassed for comparing the 1st Amendment with a telemarketer call.

 

You're the one that said they are the rights of the government and only apply to the government, not me.

 

All I was saying is that the 1st Amendment is under attack everywhere and is a slippery slope. I hope writing all that made you feel better and smarter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're the one that said they are the rights of the government and only apply to the government, not me.

All I was saying is that the 1st Amendment is under attack everywhere and is a slippery slope. I hope writing all that made you feel better and smarter.

We must have read different posts because I don’t see where they made any such statements. They factually stated that the 1A only prevents gov prosecution.

 

Where is the 1A under attack? On this forum? Twitter, FB etc? I suggest you take his advice and read up on the bill of rights because you don’t seem to understand who they protect and from whom.

 

Simply put - the 1A does not apply to this forum or any other social media website and therefore cannot be under attack. Yes you have 1A rights but so do the owners of IC,Twitter etc as private citizens. You have the right to stand on a public sidewalk and preach your religion but the moment you step onto private property your right ends.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

You're the one that said they are the rights of the government and only apply to the government, not me.

All I was saying is that the 1st Amendment is under attack everywhere and is a slippery slope. I hope writing all that made you feel better and smarter.

We must have read different posts because I dont see where they made any such statements. They factually stated that the 1A only prevents gov prosecution.

Where is the 1A under attack? On this forum? Twitter, FB etc? I suggest you take his advice and read up on the bill of rights because you dont seem to understand who they protect and from whom.

Simply put - the 1A does not apply to this forum or any other social media website and therefore cannot be under attack. Yes you have 1A rights but so do the owners of IC,Twitter etc as private citizens. You have the right to stand on a public sidewalk and preach your religion but the moment you step onto private property your right ends.

He said: "YOUR RIGHTS, 1A, 2A, ETC... the bill of rights protects those rights from the government TAKING THEM FROM YOU."

 

So according to you, anyone can take those rights and they only apply to the government? With attitudes like that, no wonder we are losing our 1st Amendment rights.

 

Rights apply to anyone or they're not rights. Same like the 2nd Amendment apply to anyone and not just militias, so does the 1st amendment. The government use to defend people's 1st Amendment rights but not anymore and is part of the problem.

 

I think you need to do some reading because most Americans think our 1st amendment rights are under attack. The government doesn't control the media or the flow of information. If is ok for private platforms to censor anyone they don't agree with or "conspiracy theorists", why not conservatives and Christians? The slippery slope I was talking about and it's happening right now.

 

https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/news/world-news/majority-of-americans-believe-first-amendment-rights-under-attack/20/03/

 

https://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/sep/19/first-amendment-rights-are-under-attack/

 

https://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/apr/27/first-amendment-under-attack-by-liberals/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...