Why wait for the uprising, they say it's better to start spaying as soon as possible to prevent unwanted accidents.
Which fits with the original claim I guess, that he only heard about him because of the backlash. Which is why you always need to do a little due diligence to make sure it's not just another enemy, before joining any pushback.
Like literally just scrolling their social media for 30 secs before weighing in would save pundits so many embarassments.
You're such a lying cunt, I'm not buying the retard act anymore, this is looking more like "self"-sabotage.
Hijab is literally just the Arabic word for barrier/covering.
She didn't say "a hijab" meaning the noun for a type of clothing. She said just said hijab, as in the very concept of covering, specifically in the context of women. That's how they talk, and if you can't keep up you're just going to flounder and make false statements.
So yes, she actually is claiming they're both coverings, but you got so stuck on "foreign word bad!" that you're willing to deny historical truth to deny any similarities rather than focusing on the real cultural incompatibilities. Like being rapey pedophile warmongers. A belief in religious modesty is the benign sugar coating for the poison underneath, and you're just drawing more attention to the sugar.
What is that retarded reductionism supposed to solve? No a modern nun's habit is not the same as a hijab and a habit is not the same as a 12th century wimple either l, so I don't know why you keep trying to change the subject like that.
A Benz is also not the same as a Ford, but you'd have to be dumb not to see they came from the same schools of thought and cross pollination of ideas. And actually retarded to claim they're not both still cars.
The wimple is basically just a renamed 12th century hijab, the Europeans saw it in the crusades and thought "These backwards heathens are savages, but their women not being so vain about their hair isn't such a bad idea." and brought the idea back where it proceeded to dominate European fashion for over a century.
You've said over and over again that they're not the same and I know it, without having the faintest clue what you're talking about. They are in fact the functionally very closely related and it's retarded that you're this attached to the idea they're not when you apparently know nothing about European history.
When you act retarded and have the gall to call someone else a retard, I don't know why you wouldn't expect them to want to rub your nose in it until you start to feel shame for the shit you just deposited on the table.
I don't need your permission to point out why you're being dumb every time you reply, who the fuck are you to think people have to put up with your shit-talking quietly?
I'm not the one claiming either of those are modern, in fact I've been explicit that I'm talking about historical context. It's not disingenuous to look at history as a whole, and very clearly label which time period you're talking about, rather than being myopically focused on only one period or mislabeling things as modern.
I swear it's like whenever you get half an inkling of something that sounds like a gotcha you latch on like a dog and jump to post some snarky reply before even finishing the thought process and checking it makes sense. Like I said, laziness is habit forming, even in basic logic error checking.
You're arguing with a near century old photograph, calling it modern clothing is a hell of a stretch. I think you've got lost in whatever concept you thought up in your head, this is about using native historical precedent as a pretext for invasion.
Pretending the precedent doesn't exist is a dumb, easily disproven move. Contextualising it in "fuck off warmonger pedos, we have an even longer historical context of saying that too" is the right one.
Y'know the "preaching to the choir" phrase is basically shorthand for wasting time right? And that's the best case scenario.You're not harming the cause because everyone here is on the same page already, if it was anywhere else it'd be actively counterproductive. Laziness is habit forming, so I assume if you do it here you're going to do it elsewhere.
I actually care about eventually fixing this, so either I suggest corrections, or again the best case scenario is hoping you just never try to talk to normies like that if you're just going to half ass it with lazy gotchas. It's not pretentious to have an ideal and to stick to it instead of folding the first time someone bitches about you caring too much like an insecure teenager, it's just having principles.
To answer your rhetorical that you apparently thought were self evident but really aren't: Who wore the wimple? Basically every marriageable age woman in 12th century Britain, not just nuns. What did the bible say? Most couldn't even fucking read it, they were told about it at church and the priests then said the same thing the muzzies do now about temptation and modesty. The similarities are there, not just superficially but several centuries removed, and the more effective response is pointing what 12th century Britons thought of Muslims if they're going to say the British back then were wiser, not semantics about who's name for a headscarf is better.
You say that they're completely different, but in what ways? They're both female head coverings worn because showing your hair was considered immodest for religious reasons.
Why not point out those differences instead of "foreign word bad!" and giving away an own goal to the invaders claiming people who oppose them are just ignorant racists with no real arguments? It doesn't matter too much when you're preaching to the choir here, but if you ever intend to actually influence public opinion in the wild, saying dumb stuff like that will only make them more sympathetic to centrist normies with naive bleeding hearts.
There's also the potential argument that firefighters are generally healthy and respected, and there are lots of dysgenic freaks out there spiteful of anyone happier than them.
There could be no larger gameplan than just someone who's lived a despicable life and wanted to ruin someone else's rather than improve theirs.
Well if you do want an idea probably the best place to start is examining why you think the name is somehow more important than the physical form and intent of the garb.
Foreign people use foreign words, shocking. But going "Haha, no we didn't drink l'eau, we drank water" is an embarrassing way to argue back. Tighten up that rhetoric if you don't want to make their evangelists look better instead of worse like you should.
I mean it's not entirely untrue, wimples also looked like that and were commonplace for medieval british women, and they were worn predominantly for religious modesty reasons.
The real question is why they're trying to relate to modern British by invoking their medieval history, when another key point of medieval history is Britain and Muslim nations regularly engaging in kill on sight warfare because of their intense incompatibility.
Congrats on the 200% appropriate username
MAGA country gets all the farmers, mechanics, oil workers, electrical engineers, truck drivers and police. The leftoid union gets the baristas, future sex offenders, welfare sponges and empaths, but also some pretty good music.
Yeah, bet, let's see how 10 years of exactly what you wanted treats you.
"Do not cheat when you measure the weight of something"
Clipping music stops
One will try to marry your 9 year old daughter, the other just wants a 1 night stand.
Only misstep was misdiagnosing the father who is proud his daughter is dating a muslim. The real problem is he's been castrated.
I still really hate the mealy mouthed version of shit talking that is "calling out"
It's such a passive aggressive bitch move and I hate that so many people think adding half-hearted conflict aversion to being a gossip somehow makes it more respectable not less.
What you do with half the population that is incredibly easily brainwashed into betraying their family and/or nation is the question. You'll never stop the insidious influence attempts if you do nothing about the people who constantly let themselves be influenced.
This is a super scummy and manipulative PR move to try to make MIGA look like "make Iran great again".
Because all the boomer retards have never heard of MIGA before and this is making sure to confuse them with their first exposure so if they later come across the rapidly growing discourse about Israeli influence on America they will be confused and, being the dumbasses they are, think people are talking about Iran having insidious government influence.
And it looks less like a marriage and more like the gorillette made him her complete bitch
Realistically Trump is incredibly unlikely to have the basis to claim that with any certainty rather than just bravado. They're almost certainly in information lockdown now, so any unlikely intelligence informant with access would be under intense scrutiny and probably unable to report even the partial info they might have. And the bunkers themselves are a black box, from the outside there's little they can do to tell what's happening internally.
On the other hand the IAEA isn't going to have any useful data either. They've not got observers on the ground, they were all forcibly kicked out, so the only measurements they'd have are airborne radioactive monitoring stations in the surrounding areas. These are deep underground facilities that were targeted though, they're not going to be launching particulate plumes up into the air to be measured miles away shortly after. If there's any environmental contamination it will probably be in groundwater and take a while to filter out into accessible surface sources to measure. And that's still just an if, deep underground storage is the gold standard for radioactive waste disposal/storage because it's relatively disaster resilient and any containment breaches are unlikely to bleed up into biologically relevant areas.
Nah, bronies should get as much heat as it takes to finally feel enough shame to stop telling people on the internet they're bronies.