[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / clang / komica / rwby / shota / yuri ]

/b/ - Anime/Random

Not vaccinated!
Winner of the 72rd Attention-Hungry Games
/otter/ - The Church of Otter

February 2019 - 8chan Transparency Report
Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
File
Password (Randomized for file and post deletion; you may also set your own.)
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Flag
Options

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4
Max filesize is 16 MB.
Max image dimensions are 15000 x 15000.
You may upload 5 per post.


Just 🐝 yourself. Rules.

File: 01960339e4b20b1⋯.gif (284.51 KB, 300x168, 25:14, 01960339e4b20b1d6259487b86….gif)

 No.8733540

>Muslims kill 150 people in France

>during the shooting they mutilated men by cutting their genitals off and shoving them in their mouths and they also cut the fetuses out of pregnant women.

<The media immediately rolls out the "NOT ALL MUSLIMS" narrative and right wing groups on the internet get blamed for Islamophobia and many are shut down on twitter, Facebook, and reddit.

<The French government also restricts the media coverage of the event so that people were not aware of the mutilations the shooters carried out.

>Australian guy kills 50 muslims

<The media instantly rolls out the "RADICAL WHITE MEN!" Narrative and quickly blames people that had no part in the shooting. Right wing groups are scrubbed from the internet on Twitter, Facebook, and Reddit.

How can people not see right through this?

 No.8733546

When did the 150 people in France happen?


 No.8733550

>>8733546

Bataclan concert hall, 2015


 No.8733561

>>8733552

die


 No.8733566

I think it's safe to say leftist are on the side of Muslims because both have the destruction of the western world in common.


 No.8733588

If OP had been accurate he would be right.

So if your statements are accurate, then you're right to ask how people can't see through this.

"The Media" is a lot of different things and you can't just pick the high and low that works best for yourself.


 No.8733592

>>8733552

die


 No.8733622

If anything, it's good. It's obvious they have just been looking for reasons to censor the right - this gives them the perfect excuse. Like always they'll be overzealous and do nothing but pour petrol on the fire. Nothing ignites revolution like overzealous repression.


 No.8733645

File: dcd4320cc59b482⋯.jpg (100.86 KB, 599x595, 599:595, welcommen.jpg)

File: f55cc70e80225ba⋯.jpg (59.85 KB, 809x540, 809:540, idiotspraisinginenthusiast….jpg)

File: b92e63d18fc1a09⋯.png (1.33 MB, 1303x1236, 1303:1236, doublethink.png)

>>8733540

Really makes you think


 No.8733712

File: 0a2cd71806261e7⋯.jpg (126.77 KB, 855x960, 57:64, refugess welcome.jpg)


 No.8733765


 No.8733792

>>8733540

Ok, let me break this down for your dumbass.

1. All right-wing radicals are right-wing radicals and, as evidenced by the resounding support for the attacks on /pol/, most of them condone violence. The people who carried out these attacks, along with most of the people who frequent sites like /pol/, are essentially the Right-Wing version of Radical Muslims.

2. Not all Muslims condone terrorism. In fact it's less than 50%.

>inb4 you confuse support for jihad with support for Sharia Law like the dumbass you clearly are

3. As for the horrific details of the attack in France, do you think maybe the media just didn't want to discuss people's severed cocks being shoved into their dead ass mouths?

Does this clear some things up for you, or are you gonna just call me a Kike Shill?


 No.8733798

File: 3f33b5e62dccb6b⋯.jpg (26.3 KB, 546x310, 273:155, images(3).jpg)

>>8733792

<shills gonna shill


 No.8733805

>>8733792

>3. As for the horrific details of the attack in France, do you think maybe the media just didn't want to discuss people's severed cocks being shoved into their dead ass mouths?

You might have a point, if the government of France didn't call on them to cover it up, faggot.


 No.8733809

>>8733798

On cue

>no argument? NO PROBLEM! Just call him a Kike

Remember this the next time you mock a liberal for calling someone a racist or misogynist or xenophobe or any of the ad hominem attacks they resort to when they don't have actual arguments. Faggot.


 No.8733814

>>8733805

>you might have a point, if the government of France didn't call on them to cover it up, faggot

I do have a point. And so do you.

Was this manditory? I mean, was it enforced by law? Regardless, it makes sense that they wouldn't want to report on those details because they're extremely gruesome, and because they wouldn't want to inflame the situation by further enraging the growing population of Right-Wing radicals in France.


 No.8733823

>>8733814

> it makes sense that they wouldn't want to report on those details because they're extremely gruesome, and because they wouldn't want to inflame the situation by further enraging the growing population of Right-Wing radicals in France.

and how is that a bad thing?


 No.8733829

People are retarded. I have no faith in the west. As you say, the double standard is crazy. The one that pisses me off the most is how Charlottesville was the biggest story everywhere for a few weeks, but the Spain attack that took place just five days later and had 13 people killed was in and out of the news in about a day. I bet most people here don't even know the attack that I'm talking about without having to Google it. That's how quickly it was out of the public eye.

Speaking of Spain and Islamic terror in the west in the 21st century, don't forget the 2004 attack which killed nearly 200 people. Don't forget 2005 in London when over 50 people were killed. Obviously we all know about 9/11, the Nice attack, the Bataclan, San Bernardino, Pulse Nightclub, Cologne, the Manchester attack, the Danforth attack in Toronto… am I forgetting any other major one (major as in double digit body count not including the culprits)? Only ones I can think of done by the native population on Muslims are the Quebec City attack last year and then the one today in New Zealand. Somehow, though, it's white people and white supremacy that's the bigger deal. I'm not condoning any of it, but the reaction to it all just makes me think the west deserves what it gets in the long run (meaning: takeover). And lets not even get started on how stuff like the Rotherham scandal is just not even addressed.


 No.8733835

>>8733823

I suppose it's not if you're a Right-Wing radical. Anyway, I think I got my point across.

OP's take on it is simpleminded. You're a bunch of intellectually dishonest faggots, and you're not much different from the Muslim Radicals you find so loathsome.


 No.8733843

>>8733792

>2. Not all Muslims condone terrorism. In fact it's less than 50%

Read this, especially the second sentence, to yourself again really slowly.


 No.8733847

>>8733843

Is there a point you'd like to make? I have a feeling I know what it is, but I don't want to assume you're an idiot.


 No.8733851

File: c6f18c8363d1b9d⋯.png (96.46 KB, 645x614, 645:614, brainlet2.png)

>>8733843

>not all muslim


 No.8733852

>>8733847

Tell me what you think it is instead of being a massive douche like you have been to the other poster(s).


 No.8733853

>>8733851

… you think this post was in support of Muslims?


 No.8733857

>>8733853

the greentext is


 No.8733858

>>8733857

Which is me quoting the person. Are you a journo using an imageboard for the first time?


 No.8733860

>>8733858

no. I misinterpreted you, i suppose


 No.8733869

>>8733852

I'm not gonna play this game with you. Either make the point or dont, I really don't give a fuck.


 No.8733873

File: 2e1ac1f12f672fd⋯.webm (1.06 MB, 272x480, 17:30, muhjooshill_shill_squad.webm)

>>8733792

Except that wrong you cock gargling faggot. I actually agree with the "not all muslims" shit. High profile massacres and attacks are irrelevant in how many people they kill, people only pretend to give a shit to push an agenda. Muslim terrorism is a non-issue in western countries.

And that same logic applies to "muh right wing terrorism". Vast majority of even hardcore white supremacists never actually kill anyone. And the murders that do happen are mostly common criminal shit that's at most vaguely political.


 No.8733880

>>8733869

You said you feel like you know what the point is but you won't state it. Maybe because you don't get it, or maybe because you do get it and would rather not bring it up. You chose to play a game by replying passive aggressively the first time, and I have no need or desire to appease your whiny bullshit. "I really don't give a fuck." Of course you don't, you petulant 13 year old.


 No.8733887

>>8733566

why just western?


 No.8733891

>>8733873

>high profile massacres and attacks are irrelevant in how many people they kill, people only pretend to give a shit to push an agenda

Yeah, that must be literally the only reason.

>and that same logic applies to "muh right wing terrorism"

>muh

Have you looked at the number of people Right-Wing radicals have murdered over the past few decades? Yeah, "muh". What about the support for the attacks on /pol/? Nope… just MUH.

>nothing to see here, Kike Shills, it's just MSM hysteria

>>8733880

Well, it looks like we're at an impasse, anon. Have a nice day.


 No.8733896

File: 8d527c461fc30e3⋯.webm (15.67 MB, 864x480, 9:5, Hard_Knock_Life.webm)


 No.8733899

>>8733891

>Have you looked at the number of people Right-Wing radicals have murdered over the past few decades?

Still lower than that of Islamic terror related deaths in the west.

>What about the support for the attacks on /pol/?

Much lower support by sheer numbers than support by radical Muslims; also one has no idea how many posters on /pol/ are genuine. After all, we know shills do actually exist (to what extent is unknown) and we're constantly told by our greatest friends the MSM that Russia is trying to "undermine us everywhere from our elections to our grandma's book club meetings".


 No.8733905

>>8733891

<terrorism is a real threat guyz!!!!!

Fuck off back to reddit faggot. The millions of retards we let drive are more likely to kill you than a mass shooter.

>Have you looked at the number of people Right-Wing radicals have murdered over the past few decades?

post the numbers cunt, let's see them.

>What about the support for the attacks on /pol/?

<oh noes! /pol/ is being /pol/ again!

<shitposting is dangerous!!!!!


 No.8733945

>>8733540

It's hard to come to the realization that the media showing such an obvious agenda are the same caliber of people they are appealing to. The real question is why would someone hate white men so much yet love mudslimes? because that will answer your question as well as tell you why that type of person is an imminent danger to the good people of the world.


 No.8733946

>>8733899

>Still lower than that of Islamic terror related deaths in the west

True, but I think you're moving the goalposts. By saying "muh", you were suggesting that the MSM is just sensationalizing things.

>Much lower support by sheer numbers than support by radical Muslims

We don't have any poll numbers related to Right-Wing radicals, but I'd be willing to bet the vast majority of /pol/ users support the attacks. Anyway, we can only speculate.

>we're constantly told by our greatest friends the MSM that Russia is trying to "undermine us everywhere from our elections to our grandma's book club meetings"

So, you give them the slight benefit of the doubt when it suits you. That's convenient.

>>8733905

>post the numbers cunt, let's see them

https://www.splcenter.org/20180723/terror-right

https://qz.com/1435885/data-shows-more-us-terror-attacks-by-right-wing-and-religious-extremists/

You can find this info pretty easily on this Internet thing we're using


 No.8733968

>>8733896

fuckers got an aimpoint/eotech or whatever but couldn't afford an echo trigger.

<scrub


 No.8733974

>>8733946

>unironically linking to the SPLC

Why are you even here? Go back to reddit where you belong you nigger.


 No.8733980

>>8733974

Ah, the good old "attack the source" non-argument. Classic.


 No.8733981

File: 3d2562e50b9354d⋯.jpg (10.75 KB, 426x240, 71:40, major.jpg)

>>8733540

More, more is in the way


 No.8733994

File: 4760a6d1cd7363d⋯.jpeg (11.8 KB, 196x225, 196:225, 54c6c1a710436361ac95a8f54….jpeg)

>>8733946

>argument is on how relevant muh terrorism is in the bigger picture

<posts terrorism stats only

<aren't these numbers so big guy?

Are you retarded? Here, let me finish your own fucking post.

https://qz.com/1435885/data-shows-more-us-terror-attacks-by-right-wing-and-religious-extremists/

>confirmed that the trend persisted in 2017, when most attacks in the US were committed by right-wing extremists. Out of 65 incidents last year, 37 were tied to racist, anti-Muslim, homophobic, anti-Semitic, fascist, anti-government, or xenophobic motivations.

>37 incidents

if you have a different number, you should cite your shit instead of just posting a link

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_in_U.S._by_year

>2017

>37,133 deaths

Eat shit.


 No.8733995

>>8733946

splc

>confirmation bias detected


 No.8733996

>>8733981

Lol I love this.

OP is trying to poke holes in the narrative that all white nationalists support terrorism and the rest of his /pol/tarded buddies seem to be doing their best to prove him wrong.


 No.8734001

>>8733996

>/pol/ is shitposting again guys! we gotta stop this!


 No.8734005

>>8733946

>By saying "muh", you were suggesting that the MSM is just sensationalizing things.

I didn't say "muh" to anything. I wasn't the person you were originally talking to.

>We don't have any poll numbers related to Right-Wing radicals, but I'd be willing to bet the vast majority of /pol/ users support the attacks

That's fine. Lets assume that literally every single person on 4chan and 8chan (not just /pol/, the entire base of each site) supports it. Still far fewer people than the total of radical Muslims.

>So, you give them the slight benefit of the doubt when it suits you

What exactly are you talking about? The Russia part was (at least I considered it to be obvious) tongue in cheek. You ignored the general shill part that I mentioned and people talked about shills long before CNN and co. started blaming everything on Russia. It's convenient that you ignored that though.


 No.8734016

>>8733994

>if you have a different number, you should cite your shit instead of just posting a link

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-wing_terrorism

I'm not going to spoofeed babby anymore. It's pointless arguing with you stormweenies anyway.

>posts motor vehicle fatality rates

Do you understand what this entire discussion is about, anon?


 No.8734018

File: 84b4104e2434126⋯.jpeg (60.11 KB, 685x385, 137:77, 319D9384-639F-476D-A35D-C….jpeg)

File: 01794486b1c448a⋯.jpeg (161.04 KB, 1200x800, 3:2, AA80EE2F-C860-4C84-BBD7-1….jpeg)

File: 10711525fcd4c1f⋯.jpeg (289.59 KB, 1078x700, 77:50, 88A38E8F-D878-4130-8D0C-1….jpeg)

Member all this?

Imagine if people went after Muslims they went after people on the right after this.


 No.8734024

File: 5c637ebe6ccf3d6⋯.jpeg (57.03 KB, 632x491, 632:491, 3A27E704-029E-4D19-A4A5-B….jpeg)

>>8734018

Expect this is their response

If this had been a Muslim attacking a Church it would be crickets on Twitter right now they’re a bunch of hypocritical cunts With a huge double standard when it comes to white terrorist


 No.8734026

File: f7444c89c31ba8b⋯.png (382.7 KB, 900x900, 1:1, 6e310763356b80419adf615581….png)

>>8734016

>New America's tally shows that since September 11, 2001, incidents of right-wing extremism have caused 86 deaths.

Fucking top kek.

<86 GUYS! HOLY SHIT 86! WHAT THE FUCK GUYZ, THROW EVERY RIGHTY IN JAIL RIGHT NOW, 86 GUYZ!

My fucking sides are in orbit right now. Even i thought it would be higher than that.

<I'm not going to spoofeed babby anymore.

>right after i just spoonfead you half of your own argument.

>Do you understand what this entire discussion is about, anon?

Are you just """""""""""""""pretending""""""""""""" to be a mouth-breathing shitposter now, or are you serious? The whole argument was how many people terrorism actually kills in the broader picture.


 No.8734027

>>8734024

>that pic

Muslims are fucking woman-tier when they flutter their eyelashes and pout to get sympathy.


 No.8734029

>>8734005

>I didn't say "muh" to anything. I wasn't the person you were originally talking to

Ok, for future reference, say "not anon". It helps.

>still far fewer people than the total of radical Muslims

Ok, what are we talking about here? Let's recap. We're talking about how the MSM chooses to report on things. Your point is irrelevant with respect to the the way they address Islamic Radicalism (not all Muslims) vs. Right-Wing radicalism. Obviously they don't need to point out the fact that not all conservatives support terrorism. You see?

>You ignored the general shill part that I mentioned and people talked about shills long before CNN and co

Ok, maybe stop with the bratty sarcasm and be a little more direct. So, let me get this straight: are you suggesting that leftist shillery is a problem but the Russian stuff and Right Wing propaganda is just MSM hysteria?


 No.8734039

>>8734026

>My fucking sides are in orbit right now. Even i thought it would be higher than that

Most of the attacks don't have a very high body count. I guess stormweenies are just a little more incompetent than Islamists.

>right after i just spoonfead you half of your own argument

It wasn't "part of my argument". It was a stat that was related to it – a stat you could have easily looked up.

>the whole argument was how many people terrorism actually kills in the broader picture.

No, it was about the way the MSM reports on it. Try to keep up, dumbass.


 No.8734047

>>8734029

>Ok, what are we talking about here? Let's recap. We're talking about how the MSM chooses to report on things. Your point is irrelevant with respect to the the way they address Islamic Radicalism (not all Muslims) vs. Right-Wing radicalism. Obviously they don't need to point out the fact that not all conservatives support terrorism. You see?

My point is that they address right-wing terrorism way more, and as a bigger deal than Islamic terrorism.

>Ok, maybe stop with the bratty sarcasm and be a little more direct.

You first. I only get shitty with you because I've read every post in this thread, and yours (from what I can tell from the chain) started off from the bat as being cunty.

>So, let me get this straight: are you suggesting that leftist shillery is a problem but the Russian stuff and Right Wing propaganda is just MSM hysteria?

No. I'm not saying that either is a problem of super significance (as in it being some huge number like one in five posts or something) - I'm saying some of the "DUDE BASED SHOOTER LMAO" posting is shilling and inorganic just like the YANG GANG shit is.


 No.8734049

>>8733792

>Alt rights are muslims

>Muslims are not muslims


 No.8734053

File: f6217984af491d2⋯.jpg (103.48 KB, 760x800, 19:20, cc5.jpg)

>>8734039

>Most of the attacks don't have a very high body count. I guess stormweenies are just a little more incompetent than Islamists.

So even you acknowledge that it's a complete non-issue?

>It wasn't "part of my argument". It was a stat that was related to it – a stat you could have easily looked up.

A lone stat is meaningless. 86 people killed means fuck all when it's in a country of 320,000,000 people, where cars alone kill 37,000 people every year.

>No, it was about the way the MSM reports on it. Try to keep up, dumbass.

<i'm only pretending to be retarded

>>8733873

>I actually agree with the "not all muslims" shit. High profile massacres and attacks are irrelevant in how many people they kill, people only pretend to give a shit to push an agenda. Muslim terrorism is a non-issue in western countries.

My original point that you felt the need to reply to.

>>8733891

>Have you looked at the number of people Right-Wing radicals have murdered over the past few decades?

Here implying that the number of people killed is some big shit.


 No.8734060

>>8733540

>Not all Nazis xd

except "Not all Muslims" is true


 No.8734062

>>8734060

Both are true.


 No.8734069

Reminder that Brenton did absolutely nothing wrong, and every single shitskin who died deserved it a thousandfold.


 No.8734070

>>8734047

>my point is that they address right-wing terrorism way more, and as a bigger deal than Islamic terrorism.

I don't think that's true. It's obviously not a "bigger deal"; that's self-evident.

Here's an olive branch: liberals tend to be sanctimonious twats, and they engage in a lot of moral posturing when it concerns Muslims (and diversity, in general). And I'll agree that the MSM does tend to gloss over things A BIT when it concerns Islamic terrorism; nevertheless, they still cover every terrorist attack 24/7 for weeks after they happen.

>I only get shitty with you because I've read every post in this thread, and yours (from what I can tell from the chain) started off from the bat as being cunty

I've been very direct. The only case in which I wasn't was when some anon smugly told me to read a comment of mine carefully, as if he identified some major flaw in it.

Any petulence on my part is because I'm just tired of all the intellectual dishonestly on here.

>I'm saying some of the "DUDE BASED SHOOTER LMAO" posting is shilling and inorganic just like the YANG GANG shit is.

SOME. Not most. Again, we can only speculate.


 No.8734079

>>8734062

Fair enough, most Nazis don't really do what they are supposed to either.

The difference to me seems that the defense of Muslims is not defense of the religion, but of the people who follow it.

It would be more convenient if they were not Muslims. As Socialists would ban the religion if they had the choice.

Meanwhile white supremacy is the ideology itself, which is what is being targeted by the media.


 No.8734087

>>8734053

>So even you acknowledge that it's a complete non-issue?

No. I don't acknowledge that. There has been a rise in Right-Wing radicalism. People have died. And then I visit sites like /pol/ and I'm further alarmed by it.

>where cars alone kill 37,000 people every year

If you can't understand why the number of people being killed in automobile accidents is irrelevant, I don't know what to tell you.

>Here implying that the number of people killed is some big shit

I implied that it's a relatively big deal, yes. However, what you were responding to ( >>8733792 ) was about how the MSM reports on it. And by saying "muh", you were suggesting that their concerns are illigitimate – obviously I disagree.


 No.8734089

>>8734070

>they still cover every terrorist attack 24/7 for weeks after they happen.

No they don't. Look at the Spain attack of 2017. That received barely anything and a baker's dozen were killed.

>The only case in which I wasn't was when some anon smugly told me to read a comment of mine carefully, as if he identified some major flaw in it

No, that poster replied to you after you started your post there with "Ok, let me break this down for your dumbass." You began like a dick and were treated like a dick. Furthermore that poster's point (I believe) was that when you said "2. Not all Muslims condone terrorism. In fact it's less than 50%." to try to make a point. Do you know how insane that it? Under 50% is supposed to sound good? No one uses 50% as a mark unless the number in actuality isn't still pretty damn high. Lets just say that "only" 35% are okay with terrorism. That's a pretty damn big portion of people out of a religion that has over a billion people. That's a hell of a lot more people than anyone who is even an eighth of the way to being in line with /pol/'s views.

>SOME. Not most. Again, we can only speculate.

Yes, we can only speculate. And I'm making an educated guess (educated as in lots of experience on imageboards) that the vast majority is shitposting first and shilling second. I'd bet that like 20% is legit in terms of support but would never do it themselves, 75% is just shitposting even if they hate Muslims on any other day of the year, and the rest is just shilling.


 No.8734102

File: 5b54ac337916400⋯.jpeg (100.83 KB, 807x538, 3:2, 1432650104522.jpeg)

>>8734087

You've just restated your point without actually defending it. Why is 86/320,000,000 people a big deal? If life is that precious to you, why is your concern not the things that kills multitudes more people than terrorism?

>If you can't understand why the number of people being killed in automobile accidents is irrelevant, I don't know what to tell you.

And you wonder why i call you a mouth-breather. When X kills people at an extremely higher rate than Y, why is Y the issue? Surely not because it's politically convenient, rite?

> I don't acknowledge that. There has been a rise in Right-Wing radicalism. People have died. And then I visit sites like /pol/ and I'm further alarmed by it.

Why? You're concerned of being that 0.000026875% of the population that gets killed by right wing terrorism?


 No.8734110

>>8734089

>no they don't. Look at the Spain attack of 2017

They gave that about as much coverage as the recent UK van attacks. The thing is, they're not quite as sensational as mass shootings.

>you began like a dick and were treated like a dick

The fact is, I was being direct. My problem with sarcasm is it makes arguments difficult to decipher.

Sorry for being a meanie tho.

>do you know how insane that it? Under 50% is supposed to sound good?

Ok, I figured you were that dude. Glad to see you couldn't let it go lol.

OK, now let me tell you why that's dumb: you're bitching and whining about how the MSM likes to point out that not all Muslims are Radicals. Well, they're not. Not even close. And part of the reason they do this is to prevent people from becoming radicalized and carrying out attacks on random Muslims.

You're grievance about how they portray Right-Wing radicals is misguided, because the vast majority of Right Wing radicals condone the violence. The MSM obviously isn't going to treat it the same because, well… it's not the same.

>I'd bet that like 20% is legit in terms of support but would never do it themselves

That's a ridiculously conservative estimate. Either you rarely visit /pol/ or you're in damage-control mode.


 No.8734117

>>8734102

>if life is that precious to you, why is your concern not the things that kills multitudes more people than terrorism?

We're not talking about those things. Different things are different.

>when X kills people at an extremely higher rate than Y, why is Y the issue?

>duuuuuh why is terrorism an issue when lots of people get killed in car accidents?

Lol. Do you even realize how fucking dumb you sound?

>You're concerned of being that 0.000026875% of the population that gets killed by right wing terrorism?

Yes, I'm concerned about lots of things. We just happen to be discussing Right Wing radicalism because 49 people just died at the hands of someone who posted a thread on this website before carrying out the attacks.

But hey, feel free to post a thread about a different subject. Maybe I'll drop by.


 No.8734128

>>8734110

>They gave that about as much coverage as the recent UK van attacks

What attacks even?

>Ok, I figured you were that dude

I'm not. Don't try to discredit me or something by worming that accusation in.

>Glad to see you couldn't let it go lol.

Glad to see that you're ignoring that having to say "under 50%" is indicative of a pretty big issue overall.

>you're bitching and whining about how the MSM likes to point out that not all Muslims are Radicals

No. I have said over and over that the problem is that they go into "not all" when they do something and then into "omg they're around every corner!" mode when a white person and/or nationalist does something.

>And part of the reason they do this is to prevent people from becoming radicalized and carrying out attacks on random Muslims.

So why don't they do this same think when a white or nationalist person does something like this?

>You're grievance about how they portray Right-Wing radicals is misguided, because the vast majority of Right Wing radicals condone the violence

Any sort of stat on this? As in how many are actually even out there (and I mean actual radicals, not "I'm subscribed to Ben Shapiro on Youtube and post Pepe" radical).

>That's a ridiculously conservative estimate

So what's your estimate? You keep posting all these "Look, honey, just trust me" type replies, wonder why anyone would think you're a cunt and then say "Okay if you think [thing] it's because you're [thing]".


 No.8734138

File: 77947b7c4f93d2a⋯.jpg (13.87 KB, 508x508, 1:1, 77947b7c4f93d2a6de5af5a8bb….jpg)

>>8734117

>We're not talking about those things

I am. And you keep replying to me just to tell me that it's not what "we're" talking about.

>Yes, I'm concerned about lots of things.

<but i refuse to actually argue about why im concerned. Plz only discuss my specific talking point.

>Lol. Do you even realize how fucking dumb you sound?

<86 people killed!

>well actually, here's some shit that offs a lot more people than that. And here's what that 86 looks like compared to the population. And maybe there's a political motive as to why you give a shit about such a tiny number.

<u-ur dumb

wew lad (or lass. You really come across as a woman tbh)


 No.8734143

When an argument goes on this long you are both losers.

Good arguers clinch a victory in 1-2 posts.


 No.8734156

>>8734143

You new here m8? Drawn out shit flinging is an imageboard staple.


 No.8734160

>>8734156

>>8734143

one word arguments belong on twitter, retard

gb2 4um or reddit or ifunny or instagram or twitter


 No.8734166

>>8734128

>What attacks even?

I'm not going to do any more Google searches for anons. You're on your own.

>I'm not. Don't try to discredit me or something by worming that accusation in.

I think you lyin. Anons don't often use italics, and he (probably you) was the only other posted ITT who did. Gotta cover those tracks a little better, pal. Anyaway, it's irrelevant.

>glad to see that you're ignoring that having to say "under 50%" is indicative of a pretty big issue overall

Yeah, I never denied that. I guess I should have clarified that I think Islamic Terrorism is a big deal right off the bat.

>then into "omg they're around every corner!" mode when a white person and/or nationalist does something

I think you're exaggerating a bit. However, we both agree that the MSM glosses over Islamic Terrorism – we just disagree on the degree to which they do it.

>So why don't they do this same think when a white or nationalist person does something like this?

I think it's because of 3 main reasons

1. Because they want to pacify Muslims

2. Typical liberal moral posturing

3. Perhaps because white people are held to a higher standard than shitskins.

Again, we can only speculate.

>Any sort of stat on this?

Visiting /pol/ is all the proof I need. Remember, we're talking about RADICALS. And if you're going to deny that sites like /pol/ aren't filled with them, we might as well just end this discussion right now.

>So what's your estimate?

~60% support the specific attacks

~90% would support a well-orchestrated "purge"


 No.8734180

>>8734166

>it must be me (I mean him, I mean… uh, uh…) because I (I mean him, or…) used italics

No point in even replying anymore. Fucks sake be more paranoid.


 No.8734183

>>8734138

>I am. And you keep replying to me just to tell me that it's not what "we're" talking about

I can't even tell if you're trolling at this point.

<but i refuse to actually argue about why im concerned. Plz only discuss my specific talking point

You must be trolling

>"Right wing radicalism is a problem that needs to be addressed"

>"yeah, the spike in Right Wing terrorism is alarming. What should be done about it?"

>"people should wear their seatbelts and not text and drive"

You utter potato


 No.8734190

>that one faggot cucking for muslims ITT

Daily reminder that every dead muslim is a blessing. Daily reminder that there are no innocent muslims. Daily reminder that every muslim is an active participant in the coordinated invasion of Western society. Daily reminder that this centuries-long struggle will only end when either we kill all of them or they kill all of us. Christchurch was a heroic act of societal self defense.


 No.8734193

>>8734190

But that's just your opinion man


 No.8734195

File: 149db237e100fd2⋯.jpg (5.82 KB, 250x250, 1:1, 149db237e100fd2648c992e642….jpg)

>>8734183

>keeps replying just to tell me she's not going to argue with my points

<but ur the one that's trolling!

nigger please.

<"Right wing radicalism is a problem that needs to be addressed"

<"yeah, the spike in Right Wing terrorism is alarming. What should be done about it?"

>why is 86 people a year an "alarming" problem that needs to be addressed

<"YOUR NOT ARGUEING!!11!!!!!1!"

The fuck are you even on about?

<"people should wear their seatbelts and not text and drive"

Fine then faggot. Lighting strikes are a serious threat. And don't you tell me otherwise. Those 51 deaths are a big deal to me.

Fucking hell. Argue like more of a facebook normalfag why don't you.


 No.8734200

>>8734193

Rotherham

London Bridge

Berlin Christmas Market

Bataclan

Malmo

Brussels

Boston

Muslims are coordinating an invasion and destruction of the entire Western world and faggots like you get all worked up because one man dared to fight back. Fuck off, muslim-lover.


 No.8734207

>>8734195

>Fine then faggot. Lighting strikes are a serious threat. And don't you tell me otherwise

Don't carry large metal obects outside during thunderstorms. Stay away from trees or poles. It's really not a complex issue.

If you'd like to discuss the dangers of lightning any further, I'd be happy to.

>>8734190

Thank you for reinforcing my point.


 No.8734208

>>8734207

Rotherham

London Bridge

Berlin Christmas Market

Bataclan

Malmo

Brussels

Boston

Where was the outrage then?


 No.8734209

File: 2955850c77b80b6⋯.jpg (158.95 KB, 692x960, 173:240, 876543213465.jpg)

>>8734207

You forgot something

<"Right wing radicalism is a problem that needs to be addressed"

<"yeah, the spike in Right Wing terrorism is alarming. What should be done about it?"

>why is 86 people a year an "alarming" problem that needs to be addressed


 No.8734219

>>8734209

>why is 86 people a year an "alarming" problem that needs to be addressed

It's a symptom of a larger problem. See: /pol/


 No.8734220

>>8734219

>it is a symptom of a larger problem

Rotherham

London Bridge

Berlin Christmas Market

Bataclan

Malmo

Brussels

Boston


 No.8734221

>>8734219

And what's that larger problem? Are there more than the 86 deaths linked to it? Or is your larger problem just shitposting /pol/acks?


 No.8734224

>>8734219

>>8734221

Adding onto that.

I still don't believe in the "muh muslims are a threat" faggotry, but on your point. Behind the handful of muslim attacks in the west is a literal warzone in their home countries. Bit of a larger problem than whatever the larger problem of right wing terrorism is.


 No.8734225

>>8734224

>muh muslims are a threat

Rotherham

London Bridge

Berlin Christmas Market

Bataclan

Malmo

Brussels

Boston


 No.8734227

File: 142b289158196bf⋯.jpg (87.17 KB, 716x960, 179:240, 142b289158196bfa2bd233b10d….jpg)

>>8733540

>White Supremacists

>Black Shooter

Yeah… nah mate.


 No.8734228

>>8734225

Fucking hell, not this shit again.

see here:

>>8733873

It's fear-mongering faggotry and you're a retard for buying it. We don't need muh terrorism to justify not letting immigrants flood the west.


 No.8734230

>>8734228

>it's fear mongering

150 dead in Bataclan alone.

Yet 49 dead pigfuckers is apparently important?


 No.8734231

File: 9a149fc485b5ee6⋯.jpg (28.08 KB, 384x512, 3:4, abigail_shapiro2.jpg)

>>8733873

The unarmed invader is far more dangerous than the armed one.


 No.8734232

File: 76f8540cf55fa0b⋯.gif (5.94 MB, 590x640, 59:64, 76f8540cf55fa0bea54ea4944e….gif)

>>8734231

that bitch is fucking disgusting


 No.8734233

>>8734230

>sandniggers get a handle on their shit and keep terrorism to a minimum

<wtf i love refugees now

Fuck off faggot. We don't need to use normalnigger tactics to justify shit.

>Yet 49 dead pigfuckers is apparently important?

Did you not read the full post?


 No.8734235

File: d849e987c18b5e7⋯.png (866.41 KB, 1280x1024, 5:4, 78646545451.png)

>>8734232

Abigail is a national treasure you fucking homo.


 No.8734236

File: 53a918a4ca8b4af⋯.jpg (31.38 KB, 404x720, 101:180, abigail_shapiro5.jpg)

>>8734232

agreed


 No.8734237

>>8734233

>sandniggers get a handle on their shit and keep terrorism to a minimum

Are you fucking kidding me?

Rotherham

London Bridge

Berlin Christmas Market

Bataclan

Malmo

Brussels

Boston

FUCK OFF MUSLIM LOVER!


 No.8734238

>>8734221

>And what's that larger problem?

The larger problem is the mentality that fuels it and the fact that most Right-Wing radicals support the violence.

It's interesting how you guys are always quick to point to point out the fact that, even though the vast majority of Muslims aren't violent, an alarming percentage of Muslims support terrorism. But then when it involves one of your own, you gloss over the fact that most of you faggots condone the terrorism.

>behind the handful of muslim attacks in the west is a literal warzone in their home countries

Yes, but I don't live in those countries, and I don't post on jihadist websites. If I did, that would be my main concern.


 No.8734239

>>8734231

Traitors are the issue. Hence why the shooting was retarded. Blame the faggots who let them in, not the immigrants who are just acting out of self-interest.


 No.8734240

File: a1850bf6295f046⋯.jpg (36.27 KB, 422x680, 211:340, nyanyangun.jpg)

>>8734235

That's not Abigail, it's just some kike that looks like her with some disgusting skin disease. Kike lovers will hang on the DOTR.


 No.8734243

>>8734237

You didn't even answer my point you turbo-autist. If terrorism ended tomorrow, would you spread your cheeks for ahmed because he a gud boi now?


 No.8734244

>>8734243

If terrorism ended tomorrow, it would mean that all the muslims in the world were dead.


 No.8734250

>>8734238

>The larger problem is the mentality that fuels it and the fact that most Right-Wing radicals support the violence.

Again, what does it matter? Unless we actually start seeing the numbers skyrocket into the thousands at the very least, who gives a fuck?

What does it matter if there's a sharp rise in right wing shitposting if the stats aren't there to match?

>It's interesting how you guys are always quick to point to point out the fact that, even though the vast majority of Muslims aren't violent, an alarming percentage of Muslims support terrorism. But then when it involves one of your own, you gloss over the fact that most of you faggots condone the terrorism.

That's literally my first post here.

>>8733873

It's all fear-mongering faggotry.


 No.8734254

>>8734244

So is that a yes then?


 No.8734257

>>8734254

It's a no, muslim lover.


 No.8734262

File: 40c8800b0f8136c⋯.jpg (94.77 KB, 687x1000, 687:1000, 40c8800b0f8136c0e73499e64b….jpg)

>>8734240

I'll be more than happy to bury my face is jew tits while you shitpost in between sessions of masturbation and crying.


 No.8734264

>>8734250

>Unless we actually start seeing the numbers skyrocket into the thousands at the very least, who gives a fuck?

Just like with Islamic Radicalism, you need to address it as it spreads, not just once it's completely out of control. This should be glaringly obvious.

>What does it matter if there's a sharp rise in right wing shitposting if the stats aren't there to match?

>b b but it's just shitposting, guys

First of all, most of it is obviously not just shitposting. The rhetoric about "white genocide" and support for the attacks… they mean every word of it. And there HAS been a spike in Right-Wing attacks in recent years.

>that's literally my first post here.

Sorry, you all sound the same.


 No.8734267

File: f561e7d20464f56⋯.jpg (20.36 KB, 640x432, 40:27, 6947953360562138ad3098f3ec….jpg)

>>8734257

>want immigrants to fuck off elsewhere regardless of islam or muh terrorism

<ur the muslim lover!

wew


 No.8734268

>>8734262

I don't masturbate. I only fuck hot Aryan women, then I lift and drink protein shakes afterwards.


 No.8734269

>>8734264

>they mean every word of it

Damn straight. Then again, there's absolutely nothing wrong with defending yourself against the islamic invasion of the West.


 No.8734270

>>8734269

This.

The heroic man did what had to be done. The feds and armed forces refuse to send them back, so now we have to resort to shit like this.


 No.8734271

>>8734264

>puts 'white genocide' in quotes

There's absolutely nothing wrong with Nationalsocialism, nor is there anything wrong with physically revolting against a government that wants the White race dead - and this includes physical defense against the hordes of shitskins being brought in.

You come here and act like "it needs to be addressed". Nigger, where do you think we are? A vast majority of the posters here are in full support of exterminating - or at the very least, removing - the kikes from all White nations, or more ideally, the entire planet.

You seem to truly not know where you are. Go back to reddit or cuckchan if you think that anyone here will be sympathetic to some kike-defender like you who tries to doubt that there is a planned genocide against the White race going on, and who thinks people here would in any way agree with your faggotry.


 No.8734273

>>8734264

>Just like with Islamic Radicalism, you need to address it as it spreads, not just once it's completely out of control. This should be glaringly obvious.

It's just awfully convenient that undesirable groups can be shut down like this. I'm not even necessarily accusing you. It's just that your mentality opens up pandoras box, for lack of a better phrase. You can shut just about anyone down with that reasoning.

>First of all, most of it is obviously not just shitposting. The rhetoric about "white genocide" and support for the attacks… they mean every word of it. And there HAS been a spike in Right-Wing attacks in recent years.

It ultimately is shitposting regardless of what they believe. Of all the shitposting /pol/acks, very few will do much of anything, let alone something big. Again, this could be applied to just about any group. How many of the seething incels on here having actually gone out and shot up a bunch of stacy's?


 No.8734276

>>8734269

>>8734270

>1.7 billion Muslims in the world

>46,000 Muslims in NZ

>kills 49

Wow, you guys are really kicking ass. And now the shooters are going to jail for the rest of their lives while the vast majority of New Zealanders (and the world) unite against them.


 No.8734279

File: 6b32fbf9e404bda⋯.jpg (149.01 KB, 1920x1080, 16:9, 6b32fbf9e404bda56bd3085250….jpg)

>>8734268

I really hope you're not just making shit up anon.


 No.8734282

>>8734271

>There's absolutely nothing wrong with Nationalsocialism, nor is there anything wrong with physically revolting against a government that wants the White race dead

That's assuming they do indeed want the white race dead. Which they don't. So shut the fuck up. The rest of your "don't ruin my circle jerk" post isn't worth responding to.


 No.8734283

>>8734276

>unite against them

The faggots of the world have already chosen their side. This latest event changes nothing about the affiliations of the traitors.


 No.8734287

>>8734282

>which they don't

Of course! That's why they constantly try to disarm whites and import millions of rapefugees into white countries and punish white people for defending themselves! Because they don't want every single white person in the world dead!

Faggot.


 No.8734290

>>8733946

>34,725 terror attacks by Muslims since 9/11

You are such a lying sack of shit.


 No.8734292

>>8734282

>the kikes import millions of shitskins and make it illegal in most White countries besides the US to organize politically against them

>kikes constantly bombard us with anti-White lies in all forms of media

>promote population-control measures disguised as 'lifestyles' as every turn, such as 'ChildFree', faggotry, tranny-ism, and more

>hurr durr they don't want us dead though

I'll repeat myself: while your opinion may be common elsewhere, you are absolutely in the minority here. No one here is stupid enough to believe your lies. Kill yourself, kike-lover.


 No.8734294

>>8734273

>It's just awfully convenient that undesirable groups can be shut down like this

Not sure what you mean.

>Of all the shitposting /pol/acks, very few will do much of anything, let alone something big

Obviously, but you're either missing or dodging my point. It would be extremely irresponsible to just ignore the fact that various kinds of radicalism are on the rise. When you ignore an insect infestation, it spreads. Now, I realize you can apply this to Muslim Radicals and various other groups that /pol/ users focus on – and to some extent, I agree with them.


 No.8734297

>>8734294

>It would be extremely irresponsible to just ignore the fact that various kinds of radicalism are on the rise

And it was leftist and muslim radicalization that started it all by attacking us.

You'll excuse us while we finish it.


 No.8734299

>>8734294

You're still missing the point.

It's a positive thing that 'right-wing radicalism', as you call it, is on the rise. It will continue to rise until all marxists, kikes, and shitskins are sent to the grave.


 No.8734300

>>8734287

>That's why they constantly try to disarm whites and import millions of rapefugees into white countries and punish white people for defending themselves

Yes, it must be a global conspiracy to exterminate the white race.

Have you ever been diagnosed with a mental illness? Serious question.


 No.8734301

>>8734300

>completely sidesteps the point and posts an ad hominem

Looks like you've lost, muslim lover.


 No.8734302

>>8734300

not him, but see >>8734292

No one here believes you.

>hurr durr u haf mental illness

Tired kike-tier arguments and insults don't work. The only one with a mental illness is you, since you can deny the reality that the kikes are evil.


 No.8734308

>>8734294

>Not sure what you mean.

Pretty much as it was stated. You open up censorship hell when you decide that it's ok to crack down on something because "it might get bigger later". Today it's right wing terrorism and islamic terrorism, tomorrow it's a group you like or are a part of.

>Obviously, but you're either missing or dodging my point. It would be extremely irresponsible to just ignore the fact that various kinds of radicalism are on the rise. When you ignore an insect infestation, it spreads. Now, I realize you can apply this to Muslim Radicals and various other groups that /pol/ users focus on – and to some extent, I agree with them.

Ties in with my previous point. Do you really want the government to start cracking down on ideology? Do you really think you'll get to decide what does and doesn't get censored?


 No.8734310

>>8734292

Repeat yourself all you want. I think you're being a paranoid conspiritard.

>the kikes import millions of shitskins and make it illegal in most White countries besides the US to organize politically against them

I suppose it depends on what you mean here, but if most of them are non-violent (which is the case), then it should be illegal to "organize against them".

>kikes constantly bombard us with anti-White lies in all forms of media

This is laughably oversimplified, but I do find the anti-white rhetoric on the left alarming (especially against white males).

>promote population-control measures disguised as 'lifestyles' as every turn, such as 'ChildFree', faggotry, tranny-ism, and more

I don't think this is evidence of what you think it's evidence of.

Take your meds, stormweenie.


 No.8734312

File: e3704bd036369f4⋯.png (107.35 KB, 212x325, 212:325, 927f927e0c162b093e2fa6e71b….png)

>>8734310

>I suppose it depends on what you mean here, but if most of them are non-violent (which is the case), then it should be illegal to "organize against them".

<mass-immigration is such a good idea, it should be illegal to criticize

This shit again.


 No.8734313

>>8734310

>it should be illegal to organize against an invading army

Get fucked, kike.


 No.8734314

>>8734301

>sidesteps the point

How the fuck am I supposed to prove you wrong about your tinfoily, baseless assertion that """they""" want to exterminate the white race? It's not even worth trying.


 No.8734315

>>8734310

>but if most of them are non-violent (which is the case), then it should be illegal to "organize against them".

Most of them support terrorism, and no, it shouldn't be illegal to organize against them because even when they aren't violent they still take up jobs, drive the working man's wages down, leech off of welfare, and impede the white race's continued existence.


 No.8734317

>>8734310

>oy vey just take ur meds

Same retarded insults that leftykikes always use.

Also, the existence of nonwhites within White nations brings about racial degeneration as a result of mixing - a process of bastardization which can never be undone. This is why it doesn't matter how many shitskinsn are violent or not.

All of them who remain in White nations deserve to die because as long as they're allowed to remain in White nations the White/Aryan genepool will continue to become diluted.

I know that kike-lovers like you don't acknowledge the existence of race except when it suits you, but it exists regardless of your acknowledgement and is the reason why the issues of 'legality' and 'nonviolence' are of only peripheral importance.


 No.8734318

>>8734314

By actually providing evidence that it's wrong. Which you won't. Because you can't.


 No.8734325

>>8734308

>You open up censorship hell when you decide that it's ok to crack down on something because "it might get bigger later"

Yes, we need to be careful about that.

>do you really want the government to start cracking down on ideology?

It depends on the methods. Do I think /pol/ (and sites like it) should at least be heavily monitored by law enforcement? Yep. Do I think they should be shut down? I certainly wouldn't have a problem with it.

>but they'd just go underground and find other ways of spreading the message

Yes, but the problem with /pol/ is that it's very accessible and does nothing but fuel hatred and radicalism.

>but FREE SPEECH

No such thing. There are restrictions – and there should be. Call me authoritarian, I really don't care.

>Do you really think you'll get to decide what does and doesn't get censored?

See: above


 No.8734327

>>8734325

>Do I think /pol/ (and sites like it) should at least be heavily monitored by law enforcement? Yep.

Fuck off bootlicker.


 No.8734328

>>8734312

Like I said, it depends on what anon meant. Maybe if you cunts weren't so cagey (gee, I wonder why), there wouldn't be any confusion.


 No.8734330

>>8734315

No, most of them don't support terrorism. Get your facts straight.


 No.8734335

>>8734318

>prove that "they" don't want to exterminate the white race

First of all, who the fuck is "they"? Go ahead, unpack this theory of yours for me this should be good


 No.8734337

>>8734330

>stop saying inconvenient truths!

>reality is what I want it to be!

>muslims aren't really a bunch of rabid subhumans!

>if you stupid goyim keep resisting migration my parent company will lose profits!

Fuck off, muslim lover.


 No.8734338

>>8734335

>who is they

Who do you see constantly writing articles about "the end of whiteness?"


 No.8734339

>>8734337

Post the poll numbers or stfu


 No.8734340

>>8734339

80% support sharia law


 No.8734341

File: fc46606036763d6⋯.jpg (35.76 KB, 600x337, 600:337, fc46606036763d636553c53ae9….jpg)

>>8734325

Not really much too discuss then. You're a run of the mill normalfag that the authorities love. Let a couple fringe types off the leash to shoot up a school or 2, and you'll let them do anything.

I've already shown the statistics, pointed out the literal sub 0.0001% of actually being killed in one of these. Not much else to say.

Not even particularly mad. Normalfag is a very appropriate term here. The majority of the population really does buy into this shit.


 No.8734344

>Sharia law isn't terrorism!!!

How in the world could someone say this?


 No.8734345

>>8734338

See, you need to be more specific. Which articles? What, specifically, are they talking about? White people in the US? If that's the case, then they're right. The US is going to be a white minority within the next 30 years – I'm not saying I'm happy about this, it's just a fact.

>>8734340

First of all, it's more like 70% (and it's less than that in non-Arab countries). Second of all, sharia law =/= terrorism.

>>8734341

>You're a run of the mill normalfag that the authorities love

I'm just not a quixotic ideologue who thinks people should be left to their own devices.

You're not "woke", anon. You're just a naive child. Not even mad.


 No.8734347

>>8734345

>the US is going to be a white minority

Not if we have more Christchurch events!

>it's more like 70%

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

>sharia law =/= terrorism

What kind of faggotry is this? "Yeah, they'll subjugate and enslave you to their laws, but at least they won't kill you!"

Fuck off, muslim lover!


 No.8734352

File: 6e65308f1b663d3⋯.jpeg (106.31 KB, 1520x1080, 38:27, DzjaGXOXcAslbfe.jpg_orig.jpeg)

God I can't wait to make you shake in your boots shill.


 No.8734354

>>8734345

Sharia law enforcement people to coerce and kill people that don't follow it. It is the very definition of terrorism.


 No.8734355

File: 02f6c33c65580e3⋯.png (147.87 KB, 450x499, 450:499, 02f6c33c65580e3cc040c36985….png)

>>8734345

>I'm just not a quixotic ideologue

And what ideology am i of? Please do include quotes to prove your claim.

>who thinks people should be left to their own devices.

Then what the fuck are you even doing on here? This place isn't very appropriate? Are you a pedophile or something? Don't you know, 8chan is full of pedos and extremists. I seriously hope you plan on turning yourself in.

>You're not "woke", anon. You're just a naive child. Not even mad.

Naive is letting people coral you with a threat that exists only on TV.


 No.8734358

File: 4b590314bea18f3⋯.jpg (38.21 KB, 600x600, 1:1, 4b590314bea18f3f8f04bfe652….jpg)


 No.8734365

>>8734347

>Not if we have more Christchurch events!

Well, it would take about 69,387 attacks to get rid of them. Good luck with that.

>What kind of faggotry is this? "Yeah, they'll subjugate and enslave you to their laws, but at least they won't kill you!"

>poll Muslims on whether or not they think the law should conform to their religious beliefs

>most say "yes"

In the US, they make up around 1% of the population and the majority of US Muslims don't support Sharia Law. Even if they did, there's no chance of Sharia ever being recognized by US law.

>>8734354

It's terrible, but you're stretching the term.

>>8734355

>And what ideology am i of?

Oh, some sort of Libertarian/Anarchist amalgam, I'm assuming. The usual anime-poster bullshit.

>then what the fuck are you even doing on here?

I like arguing and I have no social life.

>naive is letting people coral you with a threat that exists only on TV

This just highlights your disingenuousness


 No.8734367

>>8734365

LOL. I forgot to take off my name from the thread from last night.

I am now PUSSYSLAYER69


 No.8734372

>>8734365

>t-they make up a small percent of the population!

>that makes their mass murder and attempts to enslave the world 100% okay!

>but if you say doubleplusungood things online you need to be monitored!

FUCK OFF MUSLIM LOVER!


 No.8734378

File: 4bb027a72e17d4d⋯.png (109.67 KB, 399x386, 399:386, 4bb027a72e17d4d6b0096bf4b0….png)

>>8734365

>Oh, some sort of Libertarian/Anarchist amalgam, I'm assuming. The usual anime-poster bullshit.

>provided none of the requested quotes of broofs

>I like arguing and I have no social life.

Maybe you can make friends with your cell mates, as im sure you are of upmost honesty, and will be turning yourself in as a potential domestic terrorist after viewing all this radicalizing content, right?

>This just highlights your disingenuousness

>there's no way anyone doesn't fear the 0.0001% chance of being gunned down in a nazi terrorist attack.

I figured you were shitposting before, but now it really seems you've entered the "im just pretending to be retarded" stage


 No.8734380

>>8734372

Bro… you need to relax. Did a Muslim rape you in your vagina or something?


 No.8734384

>>8734380

>no argument


 No.8734387

>>8733835

smelly dumb self hating white scum

I cannot wait to torture you for your "whiteness" on the day of the rope.


 No.8734388

>>8734378

>provided none of the requested quotes of broofs

Am I wrong, brah? Be more cagey, beta faggot.

>Maybe you can make friends with your cell mates, as im sure you are of upmost honesty, and will be turning yourself in as a potential domestic terrorist after viewing all this radicalizing content, right?

Naw, that would be a beta move, pussy. Besides, I'm not arguing that people should be locked up for expressing themselves non-violently.

>I figured you were shitposting before, but now it really seems you've entered the "im just pretending to be retarded" stage

Good thing you don't have to pretend, right?


 No.8734391

>>8734384

>no argument

Present one that's worth responding to.

Snarky greentext implications are a sign of low T, bro.


 No.8734394

>>8734365

>Thowing gays off of rooftops is not terrorism!!!

>Terrorism is ok if its against gay people!!!

Just shut up already. I'll kill any muslim who thinks he can lay a finger on me and then some even if said person is "innocent". In the quaran, it advocates decieving non-muslims so don't give me any diatribe about muslims being ok with gay people just because a few liars said so. If it were up to them, they'd genocide all gays and all 'infidels' The terrorists themselves have already said they wish to replace western civilization with a muslim one. How many terrorist attacks happen by muslims worldwide and how few muslims supposedly don't support such acts, is clear deception.


 No.8734395

>>8734388

>>8734391

>>8734380

>>8734367

>>8734365

I think the muslim lover is broken.


 No.8734398

>>8733792

>less than 50%

give me accurate estimates

not inequalities

x < 50%

so x can be 49% then, yes I'll use that

if about half of a group believe in killing you, and you still make excuses for them and instead blame the people who notice this (and want to stop it), then there's something seriously wrong with you

<but it's actually 25% (actual estimate according to PEW) you biggot

omg I'm sorry, you're right, there's no concern about 1 in 4 wanting to kill you

yes, I shouldn't worry about it, specially since the other 3 aren't even condeming the 1 in the 4


 No.8734399

File: ebb9ea9ad12a30b⋯.png (659.7 KB, 928x1028, 232:257, ebb9ea9ad12a30b07d58772dd6….png)

>>8734388

>twas merely an act

Hope you enjoyed your stay. Now kindly return to whichever normalfag cesspool you very obviously crawled out of in the near past.


 No.8734404

>>8733792

>confuse jihad with sharia law

ok so you think sharia law is ok

you fucking faggot

you sure sound like a reddit nigger

imagine being ok with

>cutting people hand's of for theft

>killing people for having sex out of wedlock

you know what, since sharia law is ok, I don't see why we shouldn't implement it

<but das racist cause le white male patriarchy


 No.8734406

File: 64ec769332f84be⋯.jpg (22.83 KB, 575x241, 575:241, D1tJmtmXQAEMo-9.jpg)

File: 7e556bfc0da6873⋯.jpg (36.08 KB, 1200x406, 600:203, D1sXb30U0AAjdpY.jpg)

File: e2dbc36934de77a⋯.jpg (87 KB, 1200x900, 4:3, 7e3f048bc8c8a205937c50fc5f….jpg)

File: 4a4e01658e919bb⋯.webm (1.46 MB, 1280x720, 16:9, ROASTED.webm)

>>8734024

Go check out that twitter thread, shitskin's getting roasted in the comments by people who aren't taking the taqiya anymore.


 No.8734409

>>8734394

>I'll kill any muslim who thinks he can lay a finger on me and then some even if said person is "innocent"

Forreal? What's your head count?

>in the quaran, it advocates decieving non-muslims so don't give me any diatribe about muslims being ok with gay people

Naw, they hate fags with a passion. U gay, brah?

>>8734399

Who's acting? You gonna run away now and try convincing yourself that I was just trolling?

You gonna tell me what ideology you subscribe to or what, bro? Was I off base? I don't think I was.


 No.8734456

I have concluded the muslim lover is a troll.

He's really on our sides but pretending to be retarded in order to foster discussion and hate against muslims.

Simply cease to reply to this thread.


 No.8734467

It surprises me why media is so upset when the unemployment and welfare support in that region dropped by 10 points overnight.


 No.8734486

File: 9a8fb9ce440155a⋯.jpg (18.24 KB, 250x250, 1:1, b9823434775b6690397adff7af….jpg)

>>8734399

>Now kindly return to whichever normalfag cesspool you very obviously crawled out of in the near past.

>as we browse /b/


 No.8734494

File: e42107d06ad3ac2⋯.jpg (155.74 KB, 2280x1191, 760:397, african-american-ministrie….jpg)

we will dominate your land soon


 No.8734517

Can someone enlighten me on New Zealand's immigration policy?


 No.8734519

>>8734517

muslims only pls

no whitey, he da debil


 No.8734537

>>8734519

haha lol


 No.8737430

Why the fuck worry about the double-standards of the kike controlled system OP? You already know going in they desire only your and your people's complete obliteration so stop whining about it when that's exactly what they work towards. Find another solution than operating in their system. That is all.


 No.8737583

File: 4d6e4d789719f12⋯.png (1.21 MB, 700x2110, 70:211, agenda.png)

>>8733588

Take that shriveled jew dick out of your mouth and open your eyes.


 No.8737585

>>8737583

9/11 isn't representative of Islam, though; the kikes did it.




[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Nerve Center][Cancer][Post a Reply]
[]
[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / clang / komica / rwby / shota / yuri ]