- Joined
- Aug 30, 2011
- Messages
- 5,411
- Reaction score
- 2,228
- Location
- In a Blue State
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Liberal
Actually, at first I responded to your flippant comment that they were just shouting and you didn’t see what the problem was. I responded with it is a problem as the article points out that the group is taking measures to become violent.I don't know, they didn't seem to do much here. Just shout over a group of people wishing to end their right to assemble.
Then you changed your argument to this incident has nothing to do with violence. Whereas I pointed out that in fact was a catalyst to start planning violent acts.But this incident has nothing to do with that, and how can they have "resolutions" and blah if they aren't to be organized?
Then you decided to point out that it was a faction. Whereas I pointed out, this makes your first comment dumb, as you said you don’t see what the problem is. At first you said it was just yelling, and now you are committing a portion of this group becoming violent. As we point out earlier.No, the article clearly states that a faction of OWS, not the whole thing, has expressed desires in keeping a violent option.
The article doesn't have anything to do with them committing violence as they had committed no violent act. They had shouted down government agents and nothing more. It went on to claim that a faction desired to maintain the violent option; not the whole.
This is correcting you people who think that somehow so long as a or a few OWS members do something, that you can then generalize it to the entire group. It's a very stupid and childish way of thought.
Again, your initial point was that there was just shouting, and you didn’t see a problem. Yet again you change direction to now say that this is just group within the group. Then you go onto a generalization diatribe which once again…had nothing to do with your initial diarrhea of the mouth (or in this case keyboard). Then I just pointed out that you aren’t reading the article, what other people write, you are just spouting out nonsense.
YOU need to learn to read
The OWSer's movement (general) will die out if they take a peaceful protest attitude. They (general) can't have that. They (general) want the authorities to bust some heads [this is no way supported by any measurement or data, BTW, it's just assumption and supposition].
More violence on the part of OWS (general) is on it's way.
That's what was written. Sorry if you were blinded by your position on OWS to actually understand the words there. Please try better.
Once again, more of the same. So if you go back to the beginning, you can see, you have no idea what you are talking about. Where do you want to bring your argument now?