An example of "tolerance"

[lordbt]

So -- All Muslims or just the ones trying to blow planes out of the sky?

Or do you not make that distinction?

Obviously, just the ones trying to blow planes out of the sky. The point I was making was that there is no way to tell who is who, so in certain situations, you have to be leery of all of them.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Muslims are the ones threatening aircraft. That may be 'bare insistence' but it also happens to be fact as well.

The 'bare insistence' is your assertion that Muslims are the threat. That you have failed to justify.

Sorry to disappoint you, but just because you make an assertion does not make that assertion relevant. And your previous assertion was, and is, irrelevant.

To the narrow-minded, perhaps. Those with a broader perspective can see that the very people that you label 'the threat' are also 'the victims'. This raises an all too relevant contradiction of terms that you are all but eager to dismiss.

You are the one who put that into evidence here, not me.

I'll stop worrying about muslims blowing up my plane when muslims stop trying to blow up planes.

Notice how you avoided my question? The question about what else we could use to identify 'the threat' other than Muslim garb? I wonder why that is...

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Obviously, just the ones trying to blow planes out of the sky. The point I was making was that there is no way to tell who is who, so in certain situations, you have to be leery of all of them.

We've already established that the same rule is true of everyone, not just Muslims. It's not as if everyone else except Muslims wear tags that say 'friend' or 'foe'. If this were the case, then you'd have an argument for saying: 'Those Muslims... I can't tell the good ones from the bad ones.' But as it stands you can't make that distinction with regards to non-Muslims either. This argument doesn't show what you purport it to show.