Posted January 15, 2017
RWarehall: THIS is the problem with people. What is "racist" about that statement?
Deconstructing it, obviously 99,99% is an exaggeration, but the point is true that most attacks of this type are being carried out by radical Muslims. That is the truth.
And here we go with you calling this poster names by calling him "racist"... for speaking the truth. He even qualified it to the extremists. He didn't say "all Muslims". How is this "racist" at all?
Yet another example of someone "playing the race card" to dismiss a legitimate comment...
There is a reason terms like "SJW" or "special snowflake" or the condemnation of "liberals" is becoming more common. It's because this type of accusatory dismissal of discussion seems to be common with those with this particular political bent. You can't make a good argument, so you call people names instead. And the next step is to claim this is somehow "hate speech" and get those who disagree with you booted from the forum with the circular reasoning that you have called them "racist".
The cycle of liberalism: 1) Someone disagrees with you. 2) Call them a racist. 3) Get them banned for hate speech based solely on your claim. 4) Win the argument since they are no longer here.
When the truth is, you, SirPrimalform, are the one "hating" through the use of hateful labels like calling someone a "racist" for seeing things in a different way.
They shout "Alibaba"? He might as well be calling them "towelheads" or some shit. Deconstructing it, obviously 99,99% is an exaggeration, but the point is true that most attacks of this type are being carried out by radical Muslims. That is the truth.
And here we go with you calling this poster names by calling him "racist"... for speaking the truth. He even qualified it to the extremists. He didn't say "all Muslims". How is this "racist" at all?
Yet another example of someone "playing the race card" to dismiss a legitimate comment...
There is a reason terms like "SJW" or "special snowflake" or the condemnation of "liberals" is becoming more common. It's because this type of accusatory dismissal of discussion seems to be common with those with this particular political bent. You can't make a good argument, so you call people names instead. And the next step is to claim this is somehow "hate speech" and get those who disagree with you booted from the forum with the circular reasoning that you have called them "racist".
The cycle of liberalism: 1) Someone disagrees with you. 2) Call them a racist. 3) Get them banned for hate speech based solely on your claim. 4) Win the argument since they are no longer here.
When the truth is, you, SirPrimalform, are the one "hating" through the use of hateful labels like calling someone a "racist" for seeing things in a different way.
SirPrimalform: Interesting, he was described by some who knew him as being a drinker and not especially religious. Must have become radicalised. Still, this article is 14 hours old so my point still stands.
catpower1980: Must be funny to read your History books, I'll probably learn that the Baader gang were neo-nazis, that the IRA were fighting for the independency of Flanders and that all their members were just heartbroken and hopeless romantics. Post edited January 15, 2017 by SirPrimalform