Very good. Now can you connect the dots?
Sigh... Nope, try again.Also yes, I can connect the dots. islam is more of a threat than White Nationalism since it's a smaller percentage of the population yet equally as dangerous.
And it is still completely invalid.I clarified my point.
We can look at it this way, Islamist less likely to go radical since small percentage. White, more likely since greater percentage.Also yes, I can connect the dots. islam is more of a threat than White Nationalism since it's a smaller percentage of the population yet equally as dangerous.
Not to mention, I live around far more potential white supremacists than potential radical Islamists. I care more about the boogeyman that may or may not be in the backyard than the boogeyman that may or may not be on the other side of the planet.We can look at it this way, Islamist less likely to go radical since small percentage. White, more likely since greater percentage.
We can look at it this way, Islamist less likely to go radical since small percentage. White, more likely since greater percentage.
Even this doesn't work for two reasons. First of all, white is a race, Islam is a religion, so we aren't comparing the same thing. Second, being white does not make me responsible for white supremacists, just as being muslim does not make a person responsible for Isis. The percentage of a population is totally irrelevant to this conversation. The only thing that matters is the threat level posed by the actual group responsible. Extending beyond that is just scapegoating.We can look at it this way, Islamist less likely to go radical since small percentage. White, more likely since greater percentage.
We can look at it this way, Islamist less likely to go radical since small percentage. White, more likely since greater percentage.
So.... travel ban on anyone south of the Mason Dixon Line?
The percentage of a population is totally irrelevant to this conversation.
None of you selfish sobs are considering the threat Islam poses for the Muslims themselves. They're your fellow citizens. Unless and until they become significant in number, they won't be much of a threat to others, except politically, if they align themselves with Christians when it comes to voting on social issues.
You are retarded.
OkEven this doesn't work for two reasons. First of all, white is a race, Islam is a religion, so we aren't comparing the same thing. Second, being white does not make me responsible for white supremacists, just as being muslim does not make a person responsible for Isis. The percentage of a population is totally irrelevant to this conversation. The only thing that matters is the threat level posed by the actual group responsible. Extending beyond that is just scapegoating.
You're the one who brought the percentage thing. I just looked at it another way.Sure, if you're retarded.
He's right. Your stupid equation only works if all whites are white supremacist terrorists and all Muslims are Islamist terrorists.
Either you are claiming that as truth or you are so stupid that you don't even get your own argument and why it's wrong.
You're the one who brought the percentage thing. I just looked at it another way.
So does this mean you've given up trying to connect the dots? Better luck next time.You are retarded.
Your explanations are without reason, without facts and full of pure hate, so please enlighten us again how much of a conservaterrorist you really are.
So does this mean you've given up trying to connect the dots? Better luck next time.
So you are going to keep trying! Good for you.No, I'm not the one that doesn't understand.
We can look at it this way, Islamist less likely to go radical since small percentage. White, more likely since greater percentage.
Would it be out of line to call him a financial terrorist?Trump makes very little effort to deal with terrorism unless its committed by brown people. He didn't even talk about the mosque bombing in Minnesota a few months ago.
If I have to explain it even further then you really are stupid or intentionally ignorant.