Tell Congress to Oppose Any Tax Bill That Would Increase Taxes for Seniors! Take Action Now

Reply
Valued Social Butterfly
Posts: 4,343
Registered: ‎01-24-2014

Re: UC-Berkely Attacks FREE SPEECH (again)

Message 11 of 117 (254 Views)

Rk-please provide accredited proof to back up your statement that this young girl was there to get "scalps"

Gee, I miss having a real President!!
Treasured Social Butterfly
Posts: 6,986
Registered: ‎09-08-2009

Re: UC-Berkely Attacks FREE SPEECH (again)

Message 12 of 117 (253 Views)

I don;t get this issue at all........................................

 

Let her speak - whats the big deal - no one except the extreme right wingers will attend if anyone and who cares - she talks on the Radio and on Fox News Daily

 

Trying to prevent her from speaking is making her a hero and her message more mainstream - if they just let her speak no one would have paid attention to anything about her 

 

 

( " Eat Tic Tacs - Grope Woman - Become President " ) " - Anonymous

Respected Social Butterfly
Posts: 41,733
Registered: ‎06-03-2013

Re: UC-Berkely Attacks FREE SPEECH (again)

Message 13 of 117 (256 Views)

Olderscout66 wrote:

From that snopes post:

 

Also, they explain, that you can partly see Rosealma as she was hit a first time by Damigo, just off camera — which is the moment that seems to have been captured in Lam's photo. In that photo, she is still wearing a mask that partially covers her face, as well as a black hat, which has been knocked off by the time we see Damigo hitting her a second time. If you take it frame by frame, you can also see the green glass bottle in Rosealma's hand before she is hit the first time.

 


--

So you admit that she was holding that bottle when she was hit.  The photo I posted shows that she was holding it as she went down.  So, it means she was there meaning to create disruption.  Her gender and weight doesn't excuse anyone defending themselves from her. 

Valued Social Butterfly
Posts: 20,692
Registered: ‎11-09-2011

Re: UC-Berkely Attacks FREE SPEECH (again)

Message 14 of 117 (258 Views)

Use of "from each to each" to describe progressive income tax is 100% pure John Birch Society tripe. You used the JBS context, and I pointed out where it came from.

Valued Social Butterfly
Posts: 20,692
Registered: ‎11-09-2011

Re: UC-Berkely Attacks FREE SPEECH (again)

[ Edited ]
Message 15 of 117 (256 Views)

From that snopes post:

 

Also, they explain, that you can partly see Rosealma as she was hit a first time by Damigo, just off camera — which is the moment that seems to have been captured in Lam's photo. In that photo, she is still wearing a mask that partially covers her face, as well as a black hat, which has been knocked off by the time we see Damigo hitting her a second time. If you take it frame by frame, you can also see the green glass bottle in Rosealma's hand before she is hit the first time.

 

Also, Snopes confirms that the second "sucker punch" does indeed appear unprovoked, as Rosealma clearly has nothing in her hands as she's punched in the video.

 

In conclusion: She was probably holding a bottle, but did not get to use it as a weapon, and it was not an IED, and people need to stop having asinine rumbles in the street to express their political beliefs because that is not activism.

 

The ONLY video frame showing her with an empty botle is when she's on the ground. There is NO evidence she had a bottle in her hand when she stood up, in fact, all the videos show her hands are empty as she's being assaulted by the fascisti Trumpette.

Valued Social Butterfly
Posts: 31,831
Registered: ‎02-21-2014

Re: UC-Berkely Attacks FREE SPEECH (again)

Message 16 of 117 (258 Views)

Olderscout66 wrote:

Referring to a progressive income tax as "from each to each" is just another sham argument borrowed from the John Birch Society.

 

No society has ever survived by taxing the workers' subsistance.

No society has ever failed by taxing the population's surplus.

 

Yet Republicans insist you can't be an American if you're retired, or disabled, or in the Military, or in school, or working part time, or, like Der Trumper, have great accountants who can turn the loss of other people's money into a billion-dollar tax writeoff for you - those accounting for around 90% of the infamous "47% who pay no federal income tax".

 

No, "From each....to each...." comes from a source other than JBS.

 

And do you have stats to make your point about the 47% who are somehow involved with the restriction of free speech in Berkeley? Are you claiming they are the anarchist mobs?


 

Valued Social Butterfly
Posts: 31,831
Registered: ‎02-21-2014

Re: UC-Berkely Attacks FREE SPEECH (again)

[ Edited ]
Message 17 of 117 (261 Views)

Olderscout66 wrote:


So after being knocked to the ground by some jack-booted thug, she picks up a weapon to defend herself. Is she required to accept her beating in good humor? Or can she pick up something no doubt dropped by one of the Trumpettes who came to attack peaceful demonstrators?


So since you were there and saw her pick up the bottle after being slugged - is that how you happened to know about the jack-boots. No one else seemed to have noticed them.

 

One clarification - she was not there as a peaceful protester. She was there to get some scalps. So, in the interest of honesty, can you drop that jazz??

Respected Social Butterfly
Posts: 41,733
Registered: ‎06-03-2013

Re: UC-Berkely Attacks FREE SPEECH (again)

Message 18 of 117 (272 Views)

Olderscout66 wrote:



So after being knocked to the ground by some jack-booted thug, she picks up a weapon to defend herself. Is she required to accept her beating in good humor? Or can she pick up something no doubt dropped by one of the Trumpettes who came to attack peaceful demonstrators?



--

Of course, a whiskey bottle was just conveniently laying there unbroken and she happened to be bending over at the right spot.  Come on, we're supposed to be sensible adults.  It has been reported over and over that she went there for a fight and not only dressed accordingly but took weapons with her. 

 

If anyone wants to be believed, they need to be factual instead of coming out with a lot of smoke. 

Valued Social Butterfly
Posts: 20,692
Registered: ‎11-09-2011

Re: UC-Berkely Attacks FREE SPEECH (again)

Message 19 of 117 (270 Views)

Referring to a progressive income tax as "from each to each" is just another sham argument borrowed from the John Birch Society.

 

No society has ever survived by taxing the workers' subsistance.

No society has ever failed by taxing the population's surplus.

 

Yet Republicans insist you can't be an American if you're retired, or disabled, or in the Military, or in school, or working part time, or, like Der Trumper, have great accountants who can turn the loss of other people's money into a billion-dollar tax writeoff for you - those accounting for around 90% of the infamous "47% who pay no federal income tax".

Valued Social Butterfly
Posts: 20,692
Registered: ‎11-09-2011

Re: UC-Berkely Attacks FREE SPEECH (again)

Message 20 of 117 (274 Views)

TxGrandpa2 wrote:

Olderscout66 wrote:

Notice how the RW lie that the woman was hitting people with a bottle has vanished, along with the claim they had this on video?



--

This doesn't appear to be a bouquet of flowers in her hand:

 

http://www.snopes.com/antifa-protestor-punch-m80/

 

The photograph of Rosealma holding a glass bottle was taken by Stephen Lam of Reuters and has not been altered (other than the red circle). However, a close-up of the bottle appears to show that it’s empty:

bottle-pic.jpg

 

 

 

 


So after being knocked to the ground by some jack-booted thug, she picks up a weapon to defend herself. Is she required to accept her beating in good humor? Or can she pick up something no doubt dropped by one of the Trumpettes who came to attack peaceful demonstrators?