My friends called me racist tonight for saying Muslims did 9/11.

Did you just randomly say that or was there more context?

Muslim isn't even a race ffs

>>18293257

It's not racist at all, what the fuck is wrong with people. Muslims did 9/11.

>>18293289
Containing just about as much information as saying 'human' tho.

"Humans did 911!!I1!!"

"Ban humans!"

File: 05dac90bafd07235a59e93f08f5e43ca.jpg (345KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

345KB, 1920x1080px

>>18293257
Because you're understandably generalizing - and you're not wrong to do so in this case, but a little specificity is what ya need here. What I presume what you faggot friend wants you to say is the type of muslim which carried out these attacks - religious extremist muslims.

Its because jews did 9/11

>>18293324
>"Ban humans!"

That's fucking stupid. It's like in WWII (well Nazis are humans, so we should defeat all humans).

Muslims did 9/11 because they were radical Muslims that wanted to alter the foreign policy of the US so they could spread radical Islam.

The fact that they're Muslims is an important point.

>>18293332
Of course it's fucking stupid, that's the point.

At least narrow the sect down, shiite, sunni, wahabi?

"Billions of people did 911" what a shit cut with the analytical knife.

>>18293257
Should have said Salafi Wahhabi Islamic extremists friendo

>>18293346
>At least narrow the sect down, shiite, sunni, wahabi?
>"Billions of people did 911" what a shit cut with the analytical knife.

That's dumb. By saying "Muslims did 9/11" is not saying "ALL Muslims did 9/11". It's just saying a number greater than 1 Muslims did 9/11.

WTF is wrong with people.

>>18293378
And so we come back to my earlier point.

"Humans did 911!!!"

Nutjobs - extremists - did 911 friendo.

>>18293394
>Nutjobs - extremists - did 911 friendo.

Who were Muslims.

>>18293257
Because your statement implies causality - "They did it BECAUSE they were Muslim" - and therefore the generalization - "So ALL Muslims are dangerous".

I suspect that IS what you meant, but even if it isn't, you have to see that it came out sounding that way.

They were definitely killers, pretty definitely anti-American, almost certainly zealots, probably crazy, and happened (as far as we know) to be mainly Muslims.

By isolating the least relevant part of that list, you did oversimplify in a way that was implicitly anti-Muslim

File: C0xT-tuUAAEcslS.jpg (36KB, 545x588px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 545x588px

Islam is not a race.

I'm not going to bother telling commies to stop ruining this word with constant misuse; let them go ahead and do it.

OP: stop hanging out with terrorism-sympathizers.

>>18293468
>and happened (as far as we know) to be mainly Muslims.

What the fuck are you talking about, they were all Islamic extremists part of Al Qaeda.

>>18293368
Sounds like the SJW secret password to me.

Probably has a special handshake to come with it.

You should have said "the people who did 9/11 were muslim"

When you use the plural version of a religion, you are implying that what you are saying applies to most of the religion.

For example, imagine if I said
"Christians hate black people"
Well, no. I'm sure there are christians out there that hate black people, so my statement is true because more than one Christian person hates black people. But my statement implies that ALL christians hate black people, or that something about Christianity is fundamentally related to hating black people.
I could say "christians believe in Jesus" or even "christians are hypocritical"(an opinion that generalizes a group).

To say "muslims did 9/11" implies that all muslims, as a group, in some way contributed or condoned 9/11

Just adding something:

Saying "muslims did 9/11" just makes you look dumb. I'm not a sjw- this is just a matter of grammar and accuracy.
If you're going to express an opinion that most people are likely to be apprehensive about, you need to do so in a way that is clear and accurate or else you risk looking like an idiot

>>18293512
>To say "muslims did 9/11" implies that all muslims, as a group, in some way contributed or condoned 9/11

No it doesn't. All of you fucking failed reading comprehension.

Who bombed Pearl Harbor?
"Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor." FUCKING ALL OF THEM? Even the little babies, you fucking idiot?

>>18293517
Did you even bother to read the rest of my thing??

THE JAPANESE REPRESENT A COUNTRY WHICH IS WHY IT IS DIFFERENT.

The Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor DOES represent all Japanese people because it was a military action on the part of Japan.

Firstly, "Muslim" doesn't represent a specific country, and their actions did not represent the rest of their group.

Japan's actions did represent the rest of their group.

Try reading my example again.

>>18293517
After the bombing of Pearl Harbor, the Japanese back in Japan would say "yes! We bombed the United States!" - the actions of the small group represented the larger group

After 9/11, most Muslim people said "NO! We do NOT condone this, this does not represent us".

If a Christian person were to burn a black person at the stake, most christians would say "NO, we do not condone this!"


It's a matter of whether or not the rest of the group that you're describing agrees with the action of the subgroup.
If the actions of the subgroup reflect the ideology or actions of the large group, then you can say "muslims... or christians... or Japanese...."

It's like if you looked at sandy hooks and said "white men shoot up schools"
Would the vast majority of white men agree that they are a fan of shooting up schools? No? Then that's not an accurate statement.

>>18293520
>To say "muslims did 9/11" implies that all muslims, as a group, in some way contributed or condoned 9/11

That's fucking stupid. Who would think this, that EVERY Muslim in the world condoned 9/11. That isn't what anon was saying.

This is just incredibly fucking stupid PC shit. Muslims committed 9/11, members of Al Qaeda.

These weren't random people, they were Muslim extremists.

You can say this on any group of people, it doesn't apply to all people.

"Members of religion X committed an attack in country Y."
"Members of religion A committed an attack in country B."

No one is saying ALL members of that group committed that attack. That's fucking stupid.

But to DENY that the membership in the group had something to do with the attack is simply STUPID. They were attacking in the NAME of Al Qaeda, a MUSLIM EXTREMIST group.

>>18293520
>Japan's actions did represent the rest of their group.

That's not even true. Not all Japanese were for the war. Their leaders were, but lots of Japanese around the world were not for it, especially those in America.

>>18293346
>>At least narrow the sect down, shiite, sunni, wahabi?
That sounds fucking stupid.

When the westboro church does its bullshit we just call them failures as Christians. No one is trying to flesh out if they're based around Catholicism or if they're Protestants or whatever.

>>18293533
The Japan-US war was started by IJN leadership's inability to cope with their land forces hogging all the glory by ransacking China. That's how war really works in practice. Aristocrats are the banquet, commoners are the lavatory.

>>18293529
>It's like if you looked at sandy hooks and said "white men shoot up schools"
>Would the vast majority of white men agree that they are a fan of shooting up schools? No? Then that's not an accurate statement.

You're fucking stupid. If more than one white man shot up a black church, you could absolutely say "White men shot up a black church". How would that not be accurate? Their race CLEARLY matters.

What is more relevant is the REASON for the attack. In this case, it wasn't just RANDOM CHANCE that they were all Muslim.

The fact that they were Muslim was CRUCIAL to the REASON why they attacked.

>>18293530
I agree with you.

On the other hand, I've never heard someone saying "Muslims committed 9/11" unless it was to "justify" some hatred for Muslims.
It's not a comment you make out of nowhere - it's not "I prefer black coffee and Muslims committed 9/11". It's always "Islam is a religion of war and hatred! Muslims need to be banned! Muslims committed 9/11".
In that case, it is racist because of the context. Not all muslims committed 9/11 or condoned it, just a very small portion of them, and it's unfair and ultimately racist to say "muslims committed 9/11" even if Al Qaeda is a islamic extremist group.

>>18293548
>In that case, it is racist because of the context. Not all muslims committed 9/11 or condoned it, just a very small portion of them, and it's unfair and ultimately racist to say "muslims committed 9/11" even if Al Qaeda is a islamic extremist group.

No it's not. Watch.
Muslims committed 9/11.
Most Muslims are peaceful people and would find 9/11 abhorrent.

See how easy that was.

>>18293530
I don't feel disagree that it was a Muslim extremely group.
No one is denying that they were Muslim.

Whether you like it or not, this is how communication works. If you use a group label ("dogs do this" "fruits taste like that" "buddhists believe this"), then you are invoking the ENTIRE GROUP.

"Dogs bite people"
Sure, SOME dogs bite people. But the statement "Dogs bite people IMPLIES that ALL or MOST dogs bite people"

When you just say a category like "Girls, Boys, Mammals, Blacks", you are implying that all or most of the members of that group will align with the statement that follows.

"Those responsible for 9/11 are Muslim"
Is grammatically more correct than
"Muslims are responsible for 9/11"


Look dude, that's fine if you PERSONALLY disagree with how this works, but most people view communication the way that I'm telling you, so just be aware that people are misinterpreting what you're saying

>>18293549
It's a different context, tho.
I am telling you that it can be racist according to the context, and most of the time I hear phrases like "muslims did (this attack)" it is to justify hatred for muslims, which makes the statement racist in given context.
Of course the statement itself, in some other context, might not be racist.

>>18293394
>>18293324
/thread

>>18293552
>Look dude, that's fine if you PERSONALLY disagree with how this works, but most people view communication the way that I'm telling you, so just be aware that people are misinterpreting what you're saying

No it isn't you retard. When you say "Dogs bite people", EVERYONE FUCKING KNOWS you're only talking about SOME DOGS. We all know some dogs do NOT bite, but SOME DOGS DO.

>>18293557
NO, they don't.
When you say "dogs bite people" everyone knows that IN THEIR opinion not all dogs bite people, but in YOUR OPINION (that you are communicating to them), all dogs bite people.

You're effectively communicating to another person that you are under the impression that most or all dogs bite people.

THAT is why your friend called you racist, you communicated to him that you think most muslims approve of 9/11 and think that those actions represent them accurately.

You might say "no one thinks like that" but there are plenty of people who do. There are tons of people who say "blacks are violent" to refer to ALL blacks.

>>18293568
>When you say "dogs bite people" everyone knows that IN THEIR opinion not all dogs bite people, but in YOUR OPINION (that you are communicating to them), all dogs bite people.

But it's not even rational in the first example that ALL Muslims condone 9/11. That's a fucking stupid statement.

Consider these similar statements:
Dogs bite people
Bees sting people
Cats shed

No one thinks ALL of the members of these groups do these actions.

I'll end the thread right here. If he was asked what group did 9/11 and said "Muslims", he'd be accurate. He'd be MORE accurate if he said "a small group of Muslim extremists".

It's not racist to just say Muslims did 9/11, it is in fact true. The people that did 9/11 were in fact Muslims, and their religion was relevant to the reason of the attack.

>Muslims and leftists hate Trump for being sexist among other reasons

>the founder of Islam was 10 times the sexist Trump is

>>18293257
Get better friends, OP. Muslims did 9/11. Even if #notallmuslims, that doesnt change the fact that 9/11 was done by muslims. Not to mention the fact that muslims speaking against 9/11 are extremely rare. Your friends are politically correct idiots, they aren't honest and legit people. Stating a fact like this doesn't make you racist.

This is the most cancerous thread I've ever seen during my time on /b/. Mods please take this shit down

File: thermite_paint.jpg (105KB, 615x345px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 615x345px

>>18293493
Didn't know the rich white men running the corrupt American Military-Industrial complex were Muslims.

>>18293257
Haha your friend is closet racist himself, because he thinks Muslims are a race, hence the aggressive reaction, the same as homophobic people
Hahahaha sometimes its really funny to see right through things people try to hide

>>18293968
FUCK WHITE PEOPLE
FUCK DRUMPF

>throws homosexual off a roof for just being a homosexial
>stones woman to death who got raped for being unfaithful to husband
>rapes little boys

>>18293516
this

>>18293324
>ignoring the obvious religious doctrine influencing humans to do stuff like this

wew lad