You didn't answer. Why counter protest when you won that fight? Whatever happened they filed permits to be there.
Yes, but the Muslims are coming. You know, that group of people that thinks the most righteous and pious man to ever walk the Earth is a 7th century illiterate pedophilic slave-owning warlord. Good times we live in.
Fine, let's consider that Trump was talking about the confederate monument debate. Although I think it's F'd up that there is even a debate on idolizing men that wanted to keep a group of people as slaves...but hey, whatever... How do you explain Trump calling Mexican immigration an "Invasion" like right after the shooting in NZ? Dude used the exact same language as the shooter in his manifesto. Do you and @cml750 here think that's good language to use?
I don't think once in your life you had a negative interaction with a Muslim. Your fear is very snowflaky.
I honestly don't have a firm opinion on that. Politicians routinely and intentionally choose words that help put whatever spin it is they desire on the issue at hand. There is an entire literature on the subject and popular works as well: As far as Trump using "language" of "invasion" after an event in NZ, I haven't really given that much thought either. Here's what I do think, at least provisionally. I do think that that (a) IF the media misrepresents what Trump (or anyone else for that matter) has said on issues of race, white nationalism, immigration, etc etc, and (b) IF a shooter in New Zealand (or anywhere else for the matter) acts in part or wholly on the basis of that misinformation, THEN (c) the media that provides that misinformation and distortion of reality is guilty (at least in part) of causing whatever effect that misinformation has on that shooter's motivations and actions.
Watching 9/11 unfold on TV when I was 16 was totally cool. But I’m sure those statues have caused so many problems for you. You want 7th century morality to live in the 21st century. I don’t.
Do you believe that prior actions and words spoken can provide context on the intent of the words someone currently speaks?
But you're saying the white nationalist caused the problems. Yes they have messed up views but that's not the point. The Charlottesville story is about the violence. Not justifying what the guy who drove into the crowd did, just saying there was nothing to be achieved by the counter protesters. They weren't going to change the protesters views and the statues are coming down. No reason to be there
I believe he's pointing to the history of Trump's rhetoric towards immigrants. That they are invaders, that they are thugs, rapists, etc etc and that this hints at his intention. His intention isn't simply to twist words but to stoke racial animus in the country. You are right that a history of politicians do this...but it's not a good history when politicians start demonizing groups of people.
All Abrahamic religions follow outdated moral standards. The differences between how closely each group of followers adhere to outdated moral standards has to do with many factors such as where these groups lived such as Christians mostly residing in Europe were the climate and abudance of easily accesed coal deposits allowed for the industrial revolution along with how rapidly they secularized.
My claim had to do with Trump calling a bunch of people who joined in on a protest odgainorg by neo Nazis as "fine people".
So if an individual has a history of making false hatefilled claims about these groups of people, do you think you should give him the benefit of the doubt when they characterize those groups immigrating here as an "invasion" that isn't used in the same context as how the NZ mass shooter used it in his manifesto?
Some pretty simple thinking here. 'Muslim did 9/11 so now I hate islam' The terrorists have conquered your mind, truly they have. They wanted you to attack and speak ill and insult their religion and the people that practice their religion so that they could have a common enemy and people like you help them out.
look, I don't want to get bogged down in any of you guys's pissing match about "invasions" and "rapists and thugs" and whatnot. I am in total and 100% agreement that Trump is his own worst enemy by the things he says and the things he tweets. On all subjects, illegal immigration included. But my take on the immigration issue on the southern border is at least similar to my understanding of the "fine people on both sides" quotation. Trump has not helped himself by some of the things he has said, but many (not necessarily all) of the generalizations about his positions made in the media are based upon selective quotation and (again in some cases) misrepresentation of those isolated quotes and words to indicate something of Trump's position overall. So that there is no misunderstanding, here's an example: Trump (according to some media sources) has allegedly or putatively asserted that ALL people entering the United States illegally across the southern border are rapists, muggers, thugs, etc etc etc. I do not believe Trump has ever said or suggested any such thing. What Trump HAS said, and again I fault him for this (or at least I fault him for not making this more clear), is that the group of people entering the United States illegally along the southern border INCLUDES individuals who may be rapists, muggers, thugs etc etc etc. So to the extent that the media (on occasion, not always) appears to willfully or intentionally misrepresent what the President of the United States is trying to communicate, I fault the media for that misrepresentation.
Nope. We understand that he stated that Most Mexican undocumented migrants are rapists and murderers and thar SOME are good people(obviously implying that most are rapists and murderers). The sad part is that you don't think calling most illegal immigrants as violent criminal offenders is offensive because it makes a broad statement about illegal Mexicans than just merely Mexicans even though in reality no where near a majority of Mexican illegal immigrants are violent criminal offenders. I know enough Trump supporters to understand that Trump isn't being merely crass or isn't thinking through his words. He's stating exactly what he knows his base wants to hear. His base loves hearing fabricated stories of thousands upon thousands of Muslims celebrating 9/11 on the streets of Jersey City. They love when he makes bold campaign declarations of banning an entire religious group from immigrating here. They love when he retweets an infographic with false data created by self labeled white supremacists showing how deadly black people are towards white people. He's pandering to them. The sooner you understand this instead of this narrative in your head where he's merely just being "loose with his words" the better you will undeesunde why we hold these opinions regarding Trump .
When white supremacists are applauding the things you say about these issues, then you are saying the wrong things. It's pretty simple.
