US officials attend ‘hate group’ meeting where Muslims are compared to ‘sharks’

[mala]

Senior state officials attend 'hate group' meeting which compares Muslims to 'sharks'?

At the meeting in May in Rapid City, one invited speaker, former congressional candidate and radio host William Federer, claimed that being nice and tolerant to Muslims was a “sign of weakness”.

“Weakness invites aggression,” Mr Federer told the audience.

“Sharks can sense a distressed animal in the water, and they’re naturally drawn to attack the distressed animal. So the dilemma the West faces is the nicer the West shows itself, there’s a percentage of Muslims that view that niceness as weakness. And they take that as an invitation to attack.”

this is how dehumanization works.
start drawing lines between a group and something not human so that when the time comes to kill them you don't have second thoughts or remorse.

 

[introverteen]

That poor deluded Federer guy will face the wrath of GOD one day.

 

[Hank77]

Like comparing blacks to apes.

 

[Albion]

Bear in mind that this news comes to you courtesy of the Southern Poverty Law Center which has been charged with being a hate group itself and certainly is not an unbiased force for exposing extremist organizations, although that is how it advertises itself.

 

[SummerMadness]

When bigotry is documented, there is never a shortage of people looking to deny such bigotry. However, as the FBI hate crime data demonstrates, there has been a rise in bigoted attacks as of late.

For instance, you have bigots like in the story below where a woman kind enough to let her go ahead of her in the supermarket because she had few items and this bigot has the nerve to say she should not have been let into the country because she's Muslim. However, her idiocy is shattered when she finds out the woman was born in the United States, so she resorts to the same tactic you see on this forum, ¡OBAMA!

https://patch.com/virginia/reston/shocking-video-anti-muslim-hatred-reston-trader-joes-claim

 

[Trogdor the Burninator]

Senior state officials attend 'hate group' meeting which compares Muslims to 'sharks'?

Someone needs to find out where this guy lives, then have an old Muslim lady walk slowly past his house while a loudspeaker plays the theme from Jaws

 

[Landon Caeli]

Hey look. Guess who showed up at the beach..? It's Sharktopus!

 

[Landon Caeli]

Obviously one of the greatest series of all time... Sharknado.

 

[Landon Caeli]

Like comparing blacks to apes.

Yeah. Like comparing Asians to orangutans. Makes me so mad!

 

[Hank77]

Yeah. Like comparing Asians to orangutans. Makes me so mad!

I have never heard that one. People say really stupid things.

 

[Landon Caeli]

I have never heard that one. People say really stupid things.

I actually have.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Senior state officials attend 'hate group' meeting which compares Muslims to 'sharks'?



this is how dehumanization works.
start drawing lines between a group and something not human so that when the time comes to kill them you don't have second thoughts or remorse.

Wow...the second biggest hate group are black separatists?

You learn something every day...

 

[Landon Caeli]

 

[Landon Caeli]

If Islam is Mega Shark, then the Catholic Church is Kolossus! Battle on!

 

[Landon Caeli]

SHARKNADO is on syfy.

I recorded it last night, but I'm sure it's on today too.

 

[rambot]

Bear in mind that this news comes to you courtesy of the Southern Poverty Law Center which has been charged with being a hate group itself and certainly is not an unbiased force for exposing extremist organizations, although that is how it advertises itself.

Instead of ad homineming the source why dont you find another source to contradict the veracity of the story?

 

[HannahT]

Instead of ad homineming the source why dont you find another source to contradict the veracity of the story?

I thought it would a poorly written one. Which makes me wonder how true many of the aspects of the article is.

Normally, if you are going to call a group a 'hate group'. You name the group. They didn't name it. Later on the article they said the group was sponsored by another one that is connected too Brigitte Gabriel. That really tells you nothing.

Then they make claims of things said - yet not at the event in question, nor do they link to the actual accusation. Normally, you do this to back up your points. What was the context of the statement? Was the speaker speaking of extremist, or average everyday Muslim citizen? The statement did say, ' there’s a percentage' - and yet the article only leans on claiming it was speaking about the entire group. That's why I question the context - I mean they didn't even get that right!

I read years ago about Bridgette upbringing, and how she has experienced war growing up. Nowadays if your experiences don't line up with the popular group think? Well, you are attacked as a liar ...lol yet they don't even have sources that contradict of veracity of the lies. Sure, they have unnamed sources - or journalists. The article in question used plenty of that too. We all know you can find people to say just about anything you want them to say.

The story - not article, because it doesn't have the journalist aspects of an article - doesn't have any true sources to contradict. I hate material like this, because they want to come across as some authority...and yet they hand you nothing. I mean the way they wrote this article is just gossip. I mean how you source - someone told me - type of statements in order to contradict?

No offense, but this article isn't worth the discussion. Sounds like they got together and decided to stir the pot. Get some click bait, and make some money. Hate sells!

 

[ThatRobGuy]

I think there's a difference between calling people animals and making analogies using examples from the animal kingdom...

While his statement was based in some anti-Muslim sentiment, I honestly don't believe he was intending to convey the idea that 'they're animals'.

I think his statements are more along the lines of a person referring to people in certain professions (like lawyers or the insurance industry) as "vultures"...the intent isn't to call them animals or dehumanize them, it's mainly a metaphorical commentary on certain behavior patterns or traits.


However, if we get down to the root of what he said:
there’s a percentage of Muslims that view that niceness as weakness. And they take that as an invitation to attack

...it might be unpopular for me to say, but I don't think this statement is entirely inaccurate and there are historical examples that would support it.

Afghanistan didn't go from this 1970:

...to what we see today without a "certain percentage of Muslims seeing niceness as weakness and using it as an opportunity to pounce". That's just the objective reality.

While one might be able to accurately say "all religions can have extremists or go off the rails from time to time", the major distinction to be made is that Islam seems to REALLY go off the rails (more so than other religions) when not kept in check by a secular government that explicitly mandates a separation of church and state.

 

[rambot]

I thought it would a poorly written one. Which makes me wonder how true many of the aspects of the article is.

Normally, if you are going to call a group a 'hate group'. You name the group. They didn't name it. Later on the article they said the group was sponsored by another one that is connected too Brigitte Gabriel. That really tells you nothing.

Then they make claims of things said - yet not at the event in question, nor do they link to the actual accusation. Normally, you do this to back up your points. What was the context of the statement? Was the speaker speaking of extremist, or average everyday Muslim citizen? The statement did say, ' there’s a percentage' - and yet the article only leans on claiming it was speaking about the entire group. That's why I question the context - I mean they didn't even get that right!

I read years ago about Bridgette upbringing, and how she has experienced war growing up. Nowadays if your experiences don't line up with the popular group think? Well, you are attacked as a liar ...lol yet they don't even have sources that contradict of veracity of the lies. Sure, they have unnamed sources - or journalists. The article in question used plenty of that too. We all know you can find people to say just about anything you want them to say.

The story - not article, because it doesn't have the journalist aspects of an article - doesn't have any true sources to contradict. I hate material like this, because they want to come across as some authority...and yet they hand you nothing. I mean the way they wrote this article is just gossip. I mean how you source - someone told me - type of statements in order to contradict?

No offense, but this article isn't worth the discussion. Sounds like they got together and decided to stir the pot. Get some click bait, and make some money. Hate sells!

It's easier to think that than to start with the assumption that this is poor reporting and that these groups exist, these views are espoused, and that sometimes are governing officials (aware or not) sometimes support those organizations.

 

[HannahT]

It's easier to think that than to start with the assumption that this is poor reporting and that these groups exist, these views are espoused, and that sometimes are governing officials (aware or not) sometimes support those organizations.

lol It was easy to see it was poor reporting! That wasn't an assumption - it was fact. If you call that fantastic or even acceptable? I guess you accept low standards. I mean a high school student in freshman English could do better!

Acknowledging poor reporting doesn't equal not acknowledging odd people exist. You have to live under a rock if you can't grasp that even governing officials fall within that category! (shrugs)