I posted months ago about a black woman stabbing a white baby, and your response there's no proof it was racially motivated. So here we are at the other foot and here's the other shoe.
There's no proof that this is anything but one crazy person.
They are also investigating whether the suspect is suffering from mental illness.
Of course you and the cops are the only one offering a religious or ethnic motivation
The suspect was carrying a prayer rug, a copy of the Quran, and the suspected weapon in his backpack, "suggesting a religious motivation", police said.
I posted months ago about a black woman stabbing a white baby, and your response there's no proof it was racially motivated. So here we are at the other foot and here's the other shoe.
We are? Where are you seeing the claim that it's "racially motivated"? My argument is that this person should not be here.
There's no proof that this is anything but one crazy person.
We aren't talking about the media. We are talking about me and you. You said, in my interpretation, that I was assuming racial animus without proof because of my bias. I am now saying you are applying a animus based on a bias of yours.
I posted months ago about a black woman stabbing a white baby, and your response there's no proof it was racially motivated. So here we are at the other foot and here's the other shoe.
There's no proof that this is anything but one crazy person.
Of course you and the cops are the only one offering a religious or ethnic motivation
We are? Where are you seeing the claim that it's "racially motivated"? My argument is that this person should not be here.
One crazy person who should not be here.
They shouldn't be there based on their ethnicity. It's the samething.
?
Whether or not they should be there says nothing about your claim that the reason for the stabbing was 'racial animus'.
If you had pointed out that had the roles been reversed, the media would be crying racism, you'd be right. But now, no.
We aren't talking about the media. We are talking about me and you. You said, in my interpretation, that I was assuming racial animus without proof because of my bias. I am now saying you are applying a animus based on a bias of yours.