- Feb 22, 2012
- 10,321
- 12,147
ISIS literally claims responsibility for every attack on earth whether they were involved or not. Don't try to be clever
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
What does this have to do with my statement on mass murder? seriously, what the **** are you blabbering on about?most suicides is done by white men...some supremacy there
ISIS literally claims responsibility for every attack on earth whether they were involved or not. Don't try to be clever
In a big city like NYC I understand strict gun laws. But in the rural areas in the south and Midwest, guns are a way of life. From hunting to collecting, to heirlooms, etc. It just isn't as black/white as some news outlets like to make it sound.
Alternative facts?
We should have a White boy Travel ban to protect us from terrorists.
Funny to think about though, when an American white male does this, inaction is the order of the day, but when it's muslim extremists let's take as much action as possible and ban/wipe islam off the face of the earth. A bit of white supremacy in play here that some folks aren't seeing.
Your post would make sense if you could prove that rates in those countries wouldn't be higher it the population had easier access to guns.This would make sense if suicide rates weren't the highest in the world in countries with the most gun control.
You're an adult I assume, you understand context. The politicizing of that rhetoric has led to laws (well, attempts) and aggressive measures. On the flip side? "let's not politicize" and essentially inaction.They banning/wiping islam off the face of the earth?
What does this have to do with my statement on mass murder? seriously, what the **** are you blabbering on about?
Muslim terrorist kills 15 people with a van-"This is why we need a Muslim ban!"
White American terrorist kills 50+ people and injures 400+-"Now's not the time to talk about this or politicize this"
I'd accept any ban if all bans were applied equally. You want to ban and deport Muslims, go ahead, as long as you ban and deport the millions of white people that live here too.
I live close to one of the biggest Muslim populations in the US and have never felt unsafe, but I definitely am cautious any time I see some disgruntled looking white man in public.
You're an adult I assume, you understand context. The politicizing of that rhetoric has led to laws (well, attempts) and aggressive measures. On the flip side? "let's not politicize" and essentially inaction.
It is easier to "declare war" against radical Islamic terrorism than it is to do the same against a random white boy thug/terrorist. Logically how would you be able to identify the culprit. That is why the media has been trying to link him to a certain ideology. The thought that someone did it "just because" is scary. Even if true.
***** you stupid, get off my line.i should ask you da same, since you're conflating Homeland security protocol with a mass shooting.
literally apples & oranges.
It is easier to "declare war" against radical Islamic terrorism than it is to do the same against a random white boy thug/terrorist. Logically how would you be able to identify the culprit. That is why the media has been trying to link him to a certain ideology. The thought that someone did it "just because" is scary. Even if true.
Might be one of the stupidest @#$@ I've ever seen posted here. Let's say you go to Fremont, Detroit,Paris, etc. How are you going to identify a culprit among the thousands of Muslims that live there?
Interesting. Are you white by chance and have you ever denied the existence of white privilege? you seem like the type that would, but you just wrote the most excusatory white privilege thing i've ever read.It is easier to "declare war" against radical Islamic terrorism than it is to do the same against a random white boy thug/terrorist. Logically how would you be able to identify the culprit. That is why the media has been trying to link him to a certain ideology. The thought that someone did it "just because" is scary. Even if true.
Why is it easier? Could it be because those who are in power are a part of the very same group that would then be branded as scary?
https://www.vox.com/world/2017/10/2/16396612/las-vegas-mass-shooting-terrorism-islam
American citizens far more and likely to be the victim of a white man than a Islamic terrorist and it's been that way for almost 20 years now.
It is easier to "declare war" against radical Islamic terrorism than it is to do the same against a random white boy thug/terrorist. Logically how would you be able to identify the culprit. That is why the media has been trying to link him to a certain ideology. The thought that someone did it "just because" is scary. Even if true.
Interesting. Are you white by chance and have you ever denied the existence of white privilege? you seem like the type that would, but you just wrote the most excusatory white privilege thing i've ever read.
Ok. So articulate who the "enemy" is. Are you saying that "the white man" is the enemy?
How is one of those easier than the other? Please explain
Blaming the "White Man" vs. "Muslims."
How is one easier than the other?