Warning: Some posts on this platform may contain adult material intended for mature audiences only. Viewer discretion is advised. By clicking ‘Continue’, you confirm that you are 18 years or older and consent to viewing explicit content.
Police in the town of Savage, Minnesota, are now investigating an attack on a little girl at a local school by assailants, schoolchildren, who told officials they beat her up because "she wasn't Muslim."
in order for the original comparison between white supremacists and “radical” Muslims (which you have still not defined) to be worth making at all, you need to show the difference between a Muslim and a white supremacist.
Why do I need show a difference?
so we should also expect the same from at least some white supremacists you want to make the argument that they’re not as bad. So can you name a single white supremacist who is not a racist?
Why does there need to be a good white supremists for their actions to pose a serious threat to society? They can be bad but still do little to no harm to the population as a whole.
white supremacy (and racism) is still prevalent. Just because it doesn’t hit your murder threshold for concern doesn’t mean it hasn’t literally shaped out society’s history and continues to do so.
The murder statistic, which you provided, is merely a quantifiable metric to show how rare white supremacy is. Since you have yet to provide any statistic to show white supremacy is common it’s safe to assume white supremacy is uncommon.
doesn’t mean it hasn’t literally shaped out society’s history
How does the saying go past results are not an indication of future performence.
These are the same problems with your argument through this whole thread you’ve yet to provide any evidence to back your claims.
As I said multiple times many different ways, but I guess it still has not sunk in, there does not need to be a good white supremacists for white supremacy not to be a threat, rarity is what makes white supremacy not a threat.
I’ve been waiting for you’re counter argument to this but you’ve been unwilling/unable to provide one.
deleted by creator
Why do I need show a difference?
Why does there need to be a good white supremists for their actions to pose a serious threat to society? They can be bad but still do little to no harm to the population as a whole.
The murder statistic, which you provided, is merely a quantifiable metric to show how rare white supremacy is. Since you have yet to provide any statistic to show white supremacy is common it’s safe to assume white supremacy is uncommon.
How does the saying go past results are not an indication of future performence.
These are the same problems with your argument through this whole thread you’ve yet to provide any evidence to back your claims.
deleted by creator
I can’t “get it” because you are unable defend your claims.
deleted by creator
There is, you could answer my questions, some that I’ve been asking through this whole thread.
deleted by creator
As I said multiple times many different ways, but I guess it still has not sunk in, there does not need to be a good white supremacists for white supremacy not to be a threat, rarity is what makes white supremacy not a threat.
I’ve been waiting for you’re counter argument to this but you’ve been unwilling/unable to provide one.
deleted by creator