Muslim vs. right-wing bad guy
1. Is one more dangerous or radical than the other?
2. Is one extremist or bad guy or angry man more representative of a large group than the other? In other words, should all right-wingers (or a large subset) be accused by the press of the same radicalism as the bad guys? Should all Muslims (or a large subset)?
3. When was the last time you heard of a right-wing bad guy blowing someone up? Why don't more right wingers become bombers? Have there been as many right-wing bombers as left-wing?
4. What's so special about Muslim bombers that the press feels a need to protect them as individuals, while it continues to accuse right-wingers as a group?
5. Are there government-sponsored right-wing hate groups in the US? In the Middle East? What about left-wing?
CRUD = Contamination Resulting in Undesirable Deposits.
CRAPP = Contamination Resulting in Additional Partial Pressure.
Change your vacuum pump oil now.
Test. Testing, 1,2,3.
Originally Posted by Space Racer
2. Yes, but if its deserved.
3. Timothy McVeigh, Anders Brevik (mass shooting should count)
4. Nothing is special about them, however the "press" is generally left-leaning, so this makes sense.
5. Hope not. Yes but since most Middle East governments are net exporters of terrorism, and most are not democracies, their politics don't really translate to our left-right paradigm.
My opinion is that most theocracies would fall under the very far right of our political spectrum. The only difference between Iran, Saudi Arabia and Nazi Gemany and fascist Italy is Islam.
A left wing bomber got to become a "respected" members of academia later in life, where he helped shape epically failed public education policy in Chicago, and help a left wing politician, who later became our current president, launch his political career.
He publicly admits no no regrets about the things he has done, and did no prison time.
If more government is the answer, then it's a really stupid question.