Motives

When Muslims drive trucks packed with explosives into crowds of people killing hundreds each year, the media are quick to say that this behavior has nothing to do with religious belief. It happened because the man lacked good opportunities in life and was driven to violence in response to oppressive imperialism.

Yet when some sexually frustrated headcase commits a crime like this, they have no problem identifying what motivated him. It was misogyny, and an obsession with Chad&Stacey memes. Obviously.

We would never expect the media to say "This has nothing to do with misogyny, or red pill philosophy. This man was driven to violence in response to male-o-phobia, and an oppressive society which afforded him no opportunities in life."

So why is this?

Attached: svet.jpg (768x960, 78K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=5AkAGc5nOXw
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Is that a?...my god

And you know why

the Left , (Which the mainstream media and most internet media and the government are all part of) does not believe in PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY.
of any kind, whatsoever. So when someone commits a crime they look for excuses , because if they admitted it was the guy's own fault and he killed people of his own accord, they'd be admitting there's such a thing as personal responsibility and then their whole worldview would come crashing down like a Jenga tower.

Hot Grill and yes the media are hypocritical hyper leftists.

Attached: giphy (6).gif (331x197, 1.71M)

so why is it that they are selective when it comes to holding people accountable for their actions? why, in their view, are white males responsible for their actions but basically no one else is, and why do they call people who clearly are not white, white? (guy in charlottesville was a jew, toronto guy is armenian).

also, with islam specifically it seems they truly believe that if we don't do anything to provoke them the problem will just go away in a few generations as they assimilate into post-western degenerate consumer (((culture))), which may actually be true, to the extent that it possibly can be true. they want muslims to meld into the western proletariat sphere so they have access to larger demographics to sell things to.

Attached: 1515860238243.png (1191x767, 667K)

#NotAllIncels

That's a very interesting question, and it's ubiquitous in Spain. As a matter of fact, the very same day the Islamic attack in Barcelona, the media hurried up to differentiate Islam from Jihad. "Islam is a Religion of Peace" is their mantra.

But people are not believing it anymore.

See, for instance, this analysis by a Muslim woman who escaped from her country:
Ayaan Hirsi Ali. youtube.com/watch?v=5AkAGc5nOXw

Historically, Muhammad was nothing but a warlord who wanted to legitimize his conquests using a brand new religion he founded. Those who didn't believe in his delusional absurdities were mercilessly executed or enslaved (look for the treatment fo Kafir, the 'infidels': kill the men and enslave women and children). Thus, Muhammad was no different from any other feudal lord with his ambitions.

Moreover, by any means was he morally respectable: he had 13 wives, including little Aisha, of 6 years old, and with whom he consummated the marriage when she was 9 years old. Doesn't it sound like pedophilia, which is actually a common practice in Muslim countries?

In the end, Islam is still a religion of 7th century, revolving around violence and war (Jihad againts infidels and pagans is one os the 6 Pillars of Islam). Unlike Chrstendom, they haven't had Renaissance, Baroque, Scientici Revolution or the Enlightenment. Muslims are still medieval people with medieval lifestyles and medieval beliefs.

If this wasn't true, why Muslim countries are mere sh*tholes, with traditions such as genital mutilation? Or the Islamic veil?

They aren't compatible with us. Islam doesn't belong in Europe!

Attached: Islam Out of Europe.jpg (720x596, 45K)

>"It happened because the United states, Britain, and Israel have a network of internationalist jewish bankers that create a layer of executive intelligence agencies that then move around money between NGOs to fund the creation of terrorism"

I fixed it

here's my opinion on the matter:

You can use one-sided responsibilities and overblowing events and the likes simply to weave a narrative that more easily fits your viewpoints. If you can convince the viewership/readership/whatevership that your viewpoints are valid by overblowing events and putting responsibility onto an entire field, you have an easier time discrediting the opposition.

Problem with that is, anyone who actually uses critical thinking sees past these attempts, either by consulting other media, trying to view this from several perspectives or whatever, which is also why the trust towards mainstream media is at an alltime low.

I may be talking out of my ass here, not like that's something new from a hans, and on that statement, pic related

Attached: 3-format2403.jpg (1920x1301, 221K)

Interesting points you make user, people seem to be cottoning on now to what Muhammad got up to, as it's easily accessible by reading the Hadith(s).
The thing that people don't seem to get, is that Allah frequently states in scripture that Muhammad was the ideal muslim and that muslims should do their best to emulate his actions.

Given that, when i hear things on this board like:
>"Islam keeps women in line and give you muh freedoms"
>"We should work together with muslims to fight degeneracy in the west!"
It makes me think that some of you are either grossly uninformed or just shills when I see this stuff really.

Take note also, that because of his marriage and consummation to Aisha, marrying girls of that age will always be acceptable and canon to muslims who actually follow the faith. Maybe some of you in the west are fine with having your daughters willingly exposed to people that believe this...
But I'm not.
Islam and its implications for non-muslims is truly terrifying stuff lads.