I can’t argue with someone who steps into a thread, tries to make a comparison, then refuses to provide a single example of why their comparison is right, then goes on to continually project that they’re the correct and rational one while it’s the other one that’s refusing to do those things.

You are just stuck on a nonsense requirement that there by has to be a good white supremists but you can’t answer any of my questions as to why.

I’m simply asking you to go first, since you’re the one that made the comparison. That’s all.

I stated multiple times there doesn’t need to be a good white supremists provided rational for why, none of which you have tried to dispute

f you can’t do that then why are you even here if not to just project and troll?

If you are so eager to have a discussion then you would answer my questions or rebut my reasoning. Instead you keep repeating that there needs to be a good white supremists without providing reasoning.

Here are some questions to ponder.

• what would one good white supremists change?
• With one good white supremists would they become less of a threat?
• If a group has 10 murders in it does the group become less dangerous if the 11th is not a murderer?
• What makes the rarity of white supremists instances of violence incomparable to the rarity of Muslim instances of violence?
• How does the trail of tears, slave trade, make white supremacy a danger today?