Reply With Quote
right, evangelical extremists.
Hagee is a uva drug
They become extremists by reading John Hagee's twitter feed.
right, evangelical extremists.
Hagee is a uva drug
There are plenty of reasons one becomes radicalized. Religion is only one.
They do this all the time
Yes, but this conversation is about religious radicals.
What religion was Nazi?
No reason to parrot this time.
This conversation is about radical muslims as well as Nazism which was a nationalistic movement.
anyone siding with schilling is an idiot. This tweet was just pure ignorance and not based on facts. Islamic extremism is a Western creation... do your research kiddos
Geez Chump. You also do this when you run out of arguments. Its hilarious.
So it's not exclusively about religious extremists.
No, I just don't think you are getting the connotation that made suspending Schilling a no-brainer.
The Wahabbism movement started in the 1800s, but the West did help them get power in Saudi Arabia. But extremism was way before that.
Now, I'll leave the other side to you.
Nazism wasn't based on religion.
You're right. Thank you for clearing it up.
I know what he meant, but it wasn't that outrageous in my opinion.
Thanks for making my point.
Wahhabists and Americans have been allies for a minute now.
Islamophobia has been a tactic of US media ever since 9/11... and it tricks tools like Schilling
Once the oil runs out, the Saudis will have to fend for themselves which they can since they buy more artillery from the US than anyone else. Oh wait, they need to beg for Pakistani fighters to actually use those weapons.
Horrible tactic by the religious right. It was working in the 2000s till the Iraq invasion went South. However, they're trying to use it to justify further by fighting new mosques from being built, bullying Iran, trying to spread their religion in the Middle East and other countries. Dirty game they're playing. It will amount to nothing in the end just like the Iraq invasion.
So, then we agree that a f'ed up ideology isn't a condemnation of an entire religion.
I've never actually seen you say that. Usually you are working hard to imply the opposite.
Why use a percentage if he's not implicating regular Muslims as part of the problem? If the point is that a few extremists can change the world, why not use the actual numbers. The Muslim population of today and the German population of 1940 aren't anywhere close to each other, so using percentages of completely different bases isn't a great way of communicating size.
I don't think it was just bad math or reasoning or semantics, the picture is clearly rationale for being su ious of Muslims. It's entirely possible that Schilling didn't see it that way and impulsively tweeted it, but I don't see how it's possible to see the image as anything but anti-Muslim.
the comparison is about radical muslims to nazis, but there's also the comparison of the rest of Germany to the rest of the muslims.
if it went "that way" for Germany in what way exactly is it going to go for muslims?
Lollllll you're one of the bigger Islamophobes here
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
