In a recent Jihad Watch notice about a couple of Muslims who were taken off a plane in Texas and then as a response have used the incident as a vehicle for two subtypes of Jihad -- the jihad of lawfare and the jihad of the publicity stunt -- we notice that our old friend "the Big W" crosses paths with our old nemesis "Angemon".
This isn't the first time Angemon has poked his infernal Bugs Bunny nose into the Counter-Jihad to ask a stupid rhetorical question of the Big W; I have recounted a previous time here on this blog in my posting The D word (ain't Decaf).
This time, after the Big W typed a thought you'd think any Counter-Jihadist worth his salt would find supremely unobjectionable (and would, in fact, give their thumbs up to) --
thebigW says
Sep 24, 2019 at 1:07 pm
a lotta terrorists didn’t have no beard, no towel on their heads, looked completely Westernized. so goin’ by their external appearance ain’t good enough. The fact they’re Muslim should be all we need to know to be EXTRA suspicious of them–an’ don’t get distracted if they tell you they “love America and Coca Cola and apple pie”
-- Angemon just had to butt his rabbit butt in and deposit this rabbit turd:
Angemon says
Sep 24, 2019 at 2:22 pm
“a lotta terrorists didn’t have no beard, no towel on their heads, looked completely Westernized. so goin’ by their external appearance ain’t good enough. The fact they’re Muslim should be all we need to know ”
How would one know they’re muslims unless they admitted [SIC]?
Angemon evidently meant "unless they admitted it" and left out the "it". I.e., this genius is asking how can our law enforcement & intelligence personnel know if a Muslim is a Muslim unless that Muslim "admits it"! The Big W had a scathingly apt retort:
thebigW says
Sep 24, 2019 at 9:34 pm
How would one know they’re muslims unless they admitted? So are ya sayin’ that all the census figures we have on population of Muslims in countries and total global are ALL based on each an’ ever one of them Muzzies “admitting” they were Muslim??? HA HA HA HA HA HA
Now, when I first read this exchange several days ago, I hadn't seen if there were any further responses -- say, some more Einsteinian brilliance from Angemon, or (Jennah forbid) some other Jihad Watch regular stepping in supportively on the Big W's side. Let's see what ensued, shall we...?
Well, I just looked, and Holy Toledo! Angemon doubles down on his weird fixation with a confused morass of odd logic all apparently marshaled in order to oppose the Big W's main point, which was, to remind our readers:
The fact they’re Muslim should be all we need to know to be EXTRA suspicious of them–an’ don’t get distracted if they tell you they “love America and Coca Cola and apple pie”
Here's Angemon's response in full (brace yourselves, readers). What Angemon does here is essentially complicate the Big W's point with a tedious mess of sophistry:
Angemon says
Sep 25, 2019 at 4:25 pm
“So are ya sayin’ that all the census figures we have on population of Muslims in countries and total global are ALL based on each an’ ever one of them Muzzies “admitting” they were Muslim??? HA HA HA HA HA HA”
Nice strawman, you braying jackass. My question still stands, despite your leftard/islamic fashion of trying to sneer it away. “The fact they’re Muslim should be all we need to know”. Very well – how would one know they’re muslims unless they admitted? According to you, “a lotta terrorists didn’t have no beard, no towel on their heads, looked completely Westernized. so goin’ by their external appearance ain’t good enough“. How are you going to tell who is a muslim and who isn’t unless they come out and admit it? Isn’t it beneficial to them to deny their religion in addition to looking Westernized? Why wouldn’t they deny their religion if they’re terrorists trying to cause as death and destruction as possible?
P.S.: – to entertain your non-sequitur nonsense about muslims and census, and overlooking your ignorance of how census work, go ask around for the exact number of muslims, both in the US and worldwide. As Hugh Fitzgerald recently noted on another story, “While he has everything else wrong, I hope Imran Khan has his figures right. It is comforting to think that there are not 1.8 or 1.6 or 1.4 but, rather, 1.25 billion Muslims“. Muslims and organizations like CAIR inflate those numbers so good luck trying to identify the 8-million advertised by CAIR – you’d have to turn millions of non-muslims into muslims to reach that number.
Now, my question again: how would one know they’re muslims unless they admitted? How do you propose to tell who is a muslim and who isn’t if you’re, for example, walking down a street in New York? You can’t answer it because you dug yourself so deep there’s no amount of ladders in the world to get you out. “A lot of muslim terrorists look completely Westernized so looks can’t be relied on. Wait, what do you mean, how are we going to tell if they’re muslims to begin with? What do you mean, terrorists who look Westernized to blend in aren’t going around announcing their religion?”. Foot, meet mouth.
Perhaps some other day I'll pick Angemon's sloppy mess of sophistry apart piece by piece. For now, it would be apposite to just note two blindingly glaring things: 1) that what Angemon is evidently assuming is that the Big W's advice (viz., that [t]he fact they’re Muslim should be all we need to know to be EXTRA suspicious of them) is predicated on a perfect knowledge of the identity of all Muslims who exist (talk about a straw man!) -- rather than, obviously, only on those we do know exist (a knowledge which can always be fine-tuned and augmented with more and more intelligence); and 2) that Angemon is apparently assuming that the only way to attain that perfect ("exact") knowledge of all Muslims is if they "admit" it -- which, of course, is not the only way we determine who is Muslim; and Muslims could lie about that (what they "admit" or don't "admit") anyway, even if Angemon's point wasn't a red herring, as per my #1 above.
No comments:
Post a Comment