I'll disagree on the point that in Western Europe, they usually don't immediately divulge the perp was moslem. The way you find out (quicker than the media puts it out) is when the witnesses tell of them screaming "allahu akbar" before the attacks. They usually call the person "of Asian heritage" or some bullshit like that.
Not totally disagreeing with your whole argument, just pointing out what I see when it comes to them
That could be true, I don't actually follow all news of course, but sure, I'll go along with that... Still, it really is one of the situations where you should wait and see on all information. Always.
I have no problem calling a Muslim terrorist a Muslim Terrorist if they are in fact, a muslim terrorist.
I also have no problem calling white christian terrorist a white christian terrorist if they are also a terrorist.
I'm not making any apologies for anyone. I think if you do wrong, you did wrong and I don't care what color, race, religion, you are. You're a piece of shit and should be treated as such.
Someone earlier mentioned Mohammed and his underage wives or whatever... Yeah, that's very sick, but here in the US, there are states where underage people can get married to people of any age... Some states have no age restriction on how young they can be.
We can call out a "Moozie", but we can't call out how fucking sick THAT is? Come on!
I think it's more telling that when a poster says "guess the religion", or immediately say it's a "moozie", or whatever... Not once have I seen them come back and go, oh... Well, I was wrong. I shouldn't have jumped the gun. That was stupid of me.
No, the next thing is to double down on some kind of "False Flag" or that it was a "cover up".
Why is calling a duck a duck only a problem if the duck is on your farm?