…such as the person you’re complaining is being censored by Muslims.
I’ll confess I kept waiting for to bring up the controversy surrounding Egyptian ID cards and Muslims who’d converted to Christianity.
Specifically the way all Egyptian citizens have their religion stamped on their ID cards. In the case of Christians converting to Islam the ID card was changed to read “Muslim” while in the reverse it was stamped to read “ex-Muslim” which could cause problems.
Was that because you were too dumb and ignorant to be aware of this or did you not want to bring it up because while it’s certainly quite ugly it would throw a wrench into your claims?
FTR, I don’t know if this is still the case since the Mubarak government was thrown onto the ash heap of history.
Muslims are trying to use the power of the government to penalize him for his speech. If your only argument is “technically he hasn’t been censored until they succeed” then it holds about as much water as “they don’t call it apostasy therefore it doesn’t matter that people are killed for leaving Islam.”
There is an ongoing shooting and bombing incident in Texas at a Draw Muhammad event. Two dead, cop shot.
Muslims on Twitter are claiming responsibility.
Friends of some people in this thread, I’d assume. Here comes another Charlie Hebdo fallout as we hear weeks and weeks of “you shouldn’t shoot at people, but, well, if they hurt your feel-feels by drawing something you don’t like, then we can’t expect you not to act like the giant, violent babies you are.”
Well, both of the terrorists died and no one innocent was killed. So there’s that. Next time, maybe the attackers will have the foresight to shoot up one of those gun-free zones instead of Texas.
The amount of cheering and support from Muslims on Twitter for the dead terrorists is disgusting, if not surprising. I’m sure we’ll hear back from our local apologists after they’re done setting off fireworks.
Look like the world has figured out how to build a better extremisttrap
What’s the new safe-word for encounters with Muslims? “Pens up, don’t shoot”?
I doubt that would do anything. Usually they just kill every westerner they can find.
Perhaps another political history lesson of a Middle Eastern nation will help explain this one.
I propose a new holiday: Everybody Print Out a Quranic Passage & Picture of Mohammad and Piss On It Day.
Do it tomorrow, post it to Youtube, do it again every time Muslims “punch up” at the “racists.”
Still having fun with your strawman, I see.
You really don’t seem to understand that non of the non-Islamophobes arguing with you here in any way condone or excuse Islamist terrorist violence.
If two Islamist terrorists got killed trying to violently attack other people for participating in or attending a peaceful and legal event, no matter how it may have offended their religious sensibilities, I don’t have any sympathy for them whatsoever.
You may now go back to playing with your strawman, who in your imagination is saying the things you want non-Islamophobes to be saying rather than what real-life non-Islamophobes are actually saying.
That seems irrelevant to this particular incident, since AFAIK the attackers were shot and killed by police officers. To the best of my knowledge, even in what you describe as “those gun-free zones”, US police officers are allowed to carry and use firearms.
Go on Twitter and find some Muslims and see what a “straw man” it is, my dhimmi friend.
You interpreted that tweet as a serious “claiming of responsibility” by an actual Muslim extremist?
I’m not seeing it. This seems to be the Twitter feed of a guy who mostly tells jokes about sex. (Corey Brown of the Carolina Panthers?)
The responsibility lies with the fact that the mainstream of Islam and their fellow-travelling dhimmis on the left repeatedly emphasize the defensibility and indeed the necessity of murdering anyone who draws Mohammad.
Islam itself tried to shoot hundreds of people today. Luckily, only the shooters themselves were killed due to police happening to be in the right place at the right time.
This is what you defend.
Well, I looked at the one quote you provided that you claimed was from one of the “Muslims on Twitter” allegedly “claiming responsibility” for the attack and providing “cheering and support” for the dead terrorists. It was, shall we say, not very persuasive.
Of course, even if there are some Islamist-extremists on Twitter cheering the terrorists (and there certainly may be), your characterization of the non-Islamophobes on this thread (and pretty much everywhere else) would still be a strawman.
Because none of us are condoning or excusing Islamist-extremist terrorism or support for it.
It’s not “extremists.” The “extremist” position is the 1 person in 100 who can even eke out a “violence isn’t the answer, we should just wait for the government to ban 'hate speech.” Go read what Muslims are saying about this. These people are already heroes to them.
Killing anyone who depicts Mohammad is a mainstream, unremarkable position in Islam. You just won’t admit that any sane person should be an “Islamophobe” because of this and other insane beliefs.
None of us non-Islamophobes around here are in any way arguing for “the defensibility and indeed the necessity of murdering anyone who draws Mohammad.” On the contrary, we’re absolutely opposed to it.
I must say, though, it’s cute how you keep trying to move the goalposts when you’re caught in one of your absurd errors of fact. The guy whose Tweet you posted as an example of “Muslims on Twitter claiming responsibility” for the attack turns out to be a non-Muslim African-American NFL wide receiver? Oops! No problem, just change the subject to the “responsibility” of an alleged “fact” about vaguely characterized unidentified groups of people.
[QUOTE=Haberdash]
Islam itself tried to shoot hundreds of people today.
[/quote]
By your logic, today “Islam itself” also performed hundreds of lifesaving operations, changed several hundred million diapers, donated to earthquake relief funds, and watched a lot of soccer, among other things.
[QUOTE=Haberdash]
This is what you defend.
[/QUOTE]
This is your unshakable delusion. No amount of us non-Islamophobes actually not defending Islamist-extremist violence—in fact, flatly condemning and repudiating it—manages to penetrate your bubble of reality denial.
You want it to be true that non-bigots are supporting terrorist violence, so that’s what you’re going to believe, by golly.
Which Muslims? Show me your cites, and I’ll willingly go read them.
I already went and read the one cite you provided as an example of “what Muslims are saying about this”. It did not inspire a whole lot of confidence in your reliability as a reporter of Muslim opinion.
In some interpretations of Islam, it is. You are the one who keeps insisting that we should ignore or disallow as invalid all interpretations of Islam that don’t endorse such extremist and tyrannical beliefs.
I don’t believe your mealy-mouthed denials. For all we know, one of the shooters saw the page of people like you explaining why Geert Wilders doesn’t deserve free speech rights and decided to go act on it (he was speaking at the event and was probably the real target, though most sources are not reporting this because journalists are idiots and don’t know who he is).
Every person who values peace and freedom is already an “Islamophobe.” You distancing yourself from the condemnation of Islam and then claiming you aren’t supporting what Muslims do is not sustainable.
In addition to the weeks we have to look forward to of justifications for the attack, I also am not going to be happy about all the people claiming that if only we had a “hate speech” law to shut down this event, none of this ever would have happened. I’m making concrete predictions that I will refer back to when they come to pass later; you’re throwing out “you’re not allowed to dislike Islam because that makes you a person who dislikes Islam!” like a magic charm.