3rdLeg wrote:Obviously you never read my previous posts. My point being and i ain't wrong, a white person doing this would have to be mentally ill, however a central asian or ME person would be labelled a terrorist regardless if mentally ill or not. THIS IS FACT and shown repeatedly in the media when such atrocities occur.
There are no apologies in my posts unless me wanting that fucker to "Burn" is an apology? Like i said, read it all before you comment.
Since 9/11, the muslim faith has gained a reputation for violent terrorism. Prior to that, although there were random acts of terrorism, like the US Embassy bombing in Kenya for example, islam wasn't widely seen as being a threat to the rest of society.
Because of the magnitude of 9/11, and the frequency of the extreme barbaric attacks since, the rise of Isis, and 'home grown' terrorists, islam, quite rightly, is now seen as being a threat to the civilised world. Driving cars into innocent bystanders has become the modus operandi of islamic terrorists.
So when a muslim (from the faith with the reputation of being a threat to society) drives a car at innocent bystanders (the terrorist's modus operandi), of course people will assume it's (yet another) islamic terrorist attack. Then people like you pipe up with 'if he was white, people would say he was mentally ill. The reason for that, is that in modern society, white westerners do not have a reputation for committing such crimes against people of other faiths or races. Such reputations take a while to develop. Islam has it, westerners don't have it
As mentioned, it doesn't make a great deal of difference anyway whether he was mentally ill or a terrorist, not being terrorism doesn't make the attack more acceptable. Even if he wasn't affiliated to a terrorist organisation, he was almost certainly influenced by them in his MO. Like I said, another case of Death by Muslim.