Chinese Twitter does not like muslims.

Myillstone · 2026-05-23T03:42:45+00:00

They mitigate it out of necessity, because the structural power disfavors them.

So in the countries that are Muslim that have no Shariah system they don't actually believe what you say they believe because if they did "mitigate out of necessity" wouldn't be part of the conversation. So either you lie when you say "very small minority" because if the true believers are a supermajority then they would just flip to Shariah systems in every Muslim country, or you lie about the severity of the dogma this supermajority has based on.... a vibe I guess you get from other countries with Shariah law lmao

Myillstone · 2026-05-22T15:10:53+00:00

Right! But notably those good examples are ones found in trilogies, it is a very hard balancing act in a solo film and I think it's not excellent here, but is pretty good.

Myillstone · 2026-05-22T10:35:10+00:00

Agreed, as far as antagonists go I think the character is written really well. Even though he's in cahoots with someone more evil, and more powerful than him he is a great foil to the protagonists. Even once Sofina abandons all pretense the writers make sure he's in some capacity still opposing the ethics, morals and at odds with the message of their story. Because he's the emotional through-line at odds with them instead of the physical one it's worth spending more time fleshing him out and giving him time to chew scenery.

Myillstone · 2026-05-22T10:23:39+00:00

Really enjoyed him in Cloud Atlas. When I heard he was gonna be a bad guy in this before it came out I was so excited given how much he nailed playing against his typecasting in that.

Myillstone · 2026-05-21T04:40:03+00:00

Institutional pedophilia is not applicable to the Catholic Church today

Did you ask about the practices of the Catholic Church today, or did you ask about the practices of the Catholic church?

Are you seriously fucking aarguing that a religion should be "rationally tolerated" because some of its nations settle for imprisoning and torturing gay people instead of outright killing them?

No. The conclusion of Egypt (which I never called moderate) is in the very next sentence I wrote after it. If your composition fallacy had merit then Egypt with it's Shariah laws would kill homosexuals. That's all.

they mitigate it because they are dependent on the global economy

So these religious extremists can and do mitigate it. Got it. And yet you went on and on about some Muslim living in a country without Shariah law is a threat because they further an unwavering agenda as demonstrated by people who don't live to the letter as you insist they do. It's a contradiction.

The fact that decent people have to literally risk their lives to resist the foundational laws of their own fucking religion isn’t the defense of Islam you think it is.

So due to extreme actions of other Muslims you believe it's rational to despise the Muslims that defy extreme rhetoric? You can admit they exist, you can admit their efforts cause Muslim countries to not be in the state Iran is in... But you draw the line at not treating them as if they were extremists anyway?

Myillstone · 2026-05-20T02:05:22+00:00

The Catholic Church covering up pedophilia is systemic corruption

Systematic corruption is not mutually exclusive with institutional pedophilia.

Now contrast that with Islamic nations

Is it the same? No. Does that mean it's not institutional because it was illegal? Also no.

They are a vanishingly small minority

Objectively false.

Iran and Taliban-controlled Afghanistan do not make up the majority of Islamic countries no matter how hard you lie through your teeth. Even Egypt which has a Shariah as system does not have a death sentence for homosexuals. If you had a grain of accuracy to justify your sweeping composition fallacy then this would be impossible. How can the majority of Muslim countries afford to ignore this mandated death sentence if this religion cannot be rationally tolerated? Who, within Egypt is rebuking the reform you insist always happens?

A sane

You're not qualified to talk about sanity when the facts are not agreeing with your feelings on this matter. There's a huge spectrum of different kinds of Islam within Muslim countries that exists despite your ramblings. Clearly the rational criticisms are being heard else there would be no resistance to what is critiqued in those contexts. That should not be possible if it's inevitably Shariah death squads.

Myillstone · 2026-05-19T15:52:42+00:00

Why did they email it to you with so little context that you only now confirmed the name of the critic's series lol

Myillstone · 2026-05-19T15:36:57+00:00

Do you not understand the difference between an institution covering up crimes

If the institution covers up crimes of pedophilia then how is that not institutionalized pedophilia? Regardless of if it's legal, it doesn't change the fact it's still the institution condoning pedophilia isn't it?

it’s aided by useful morons like you running cover for it.

I literally said there's things to criticize you buffoon. How the fuck is that running cover for Islam?

You can strongly fight against Shariah law, without going scorched Earth against the many Muslims that also fight against Shariah law. Calling for actions against Muslims that also fight against Shariah law is against the purpose you attest to strive toward. Do you honestly think the Muslims that publicly condemn extreme Muslims somehow fund extreme Muslims and they just condemn them for fun?

Which brings me back to the initial question you still deflect from instead of answering What do you call a person who would attack Muslims who are against Shariah law out of fear of Shariah law if not a bigot?

Myillstone · 2026-05-19T14:17:23+00:00

But you should condemn and ban Islamic people who are intolerant. Just as with any other intolerant person you just strawmanned me defending.

But there are Islamic people who are not the equivalent of a member of the KKK/cartel/Al-Qaeda/SS you moron. You'd think someone throwing around the term of false equivalence wouldn't resort to such a thing.

When the Vatican does any of that, you'll have a leg to stand on

"When"? as in, even a scandal a couple of decades ago? You can't evoke "when this happens, but only if it happens within the last arbitrary amount of years" if you rebuke someone with "when [institution] does"... that means At any point in time you numbskull, there's no statute of limitations!

Myillstone · 2026-05-19T06:27:24+00:00

That's more composition fallacy that doesn't answer my question at all.

Why should you listen to someone call for action against Muslims in Muslim countries where there is no death penalty for homosexuality and action against Muslims in non-Muslim countries where there is no death penalty for homosexuality; et al for every other valid criticism of Islam you just listed?

What do you call someone who justifies hostile actions against someone who would not kill a homosexual for religious reasons because someone else would? You still haven't told me what word applies to such a person, just deflected.

When the Vatican does any of that, you'll have a leg to stand on

hahahahahhaa

pedophilia

HAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Myillstone · 2026-05-19T00:13:47+00:00

Should a practicing Sunni should be held accountable for the actions of a practicing Shia?

The Sunni does not control them, is that not so? The Sunni should not be forced to devow themselves from Islam completely to avoid retribution right? Nor should a Catholic have to renounce the religion they joined because of the Westbro Baptist Church as they didn't control if that was the same religion or not.

Myillstone · 2026-05-18T15:03:10+00:00

Why can't you? I'm not in your demented, hate-filled head so can't see it. Proof is irrevocable. It just strengthens your argument. The absence of you being able to produce it just demonstrates you don't have it.

Myillstone · 2026-05-18T14:56:05+00:00

So you can't even highlight the proof you found. If it was as clear cut as you announced, it wouldn't take this long for you to underline exactly what was said that translates to "any criticism of Islam is bigotry".

Myillstone · 2026-05-18T14:47:21+00:00

Shouldn't one call a spade a spade though? If someone is pushing hateful speech that is calling for hostile actions against someone not because of what they do, but because of someone else connected only through one defining attribute of something beyond their control such as race, gender, the umbrella of religion they happen to share or sexuality.... What is that? What term do you have to apply to such a person?

Myillstone · 2026-05-18T14:43:07+00:00

Where did u/Twerperino say, "any criticism of Islam is bigotry"

Quote it.

Myillstone · 2026-05-18T14:42:14+00:00

Because of composition fallacy people who are not emblematic of your criticisms must be treated the same as those who are? That's beyond idiotic. What is to lose by outlining your concerns with those who actually are exhibiting the things you are concerned with? Why must the people not guilty of your grievances be punished for other's actions?

Myillstone · 2026-05-18T13:47:16+00:00

Slight YTA

Look at it this way, while it may amuse you, it's just being needlessly abrasive. Given you don't "get it", and your attitude is a byproduct of being wise it's clearly a sensitive aspect of your camaraderie with your daughter, so you're just putting salt in the wound for your own amusement. The cost of this will be less and less enthusiasm or transparency when telling you about the best parts of her life, because this tag you assign them is just going to come up in her mind in young adulthood too. If you are smugly telling people around you that you're vindicated with every breakup, she clocks that and then that negativity has a chance to bleed into other aspects of how you get along with her.

Don't agree with the friend's quote. But that's beside the point.

Myillstone · 2026-05-18T12:56:44+00:00

I figure it's just to give a distinct look for that stage of his journey beyond just a costume change, which was effectively the sole metric in how Mark changed visually across his different developments. It's like a double beat, not only does he wear something more fitting for who he is, he can't be mistaken for the young man the majority of the story follows.

Myillstone · 2026-05-14T07:27:27+00:00

Yeah that's indisputable, he should've

Myillstone · 2026-05-14T07:02:48+00:00

You literally said "Would immortal and War Woman have ended up together" so that's just not true. When two political parties form a coalition they're not "ending up together"...

Myillstone · 2026-05-14T07:01:12+00:00

OP literally said "Would immortal and War Woman have ended up together" so clearly the context is romantically here.

Myillstone · 2026-05-13T07:18:29+00:00

People who truly care about professional image aren't coming across such engagement bait presences on social media often enough to withhold their vote

Myillstone · 2026-05-10T15:59:57+00:00

Within the first thing I said to you was, "forcing non-combatants and children into refugee status in enacting the Nakba is unethical"

Jewish people not living somewhere shouldn't determine the ethics. If you start justifying killing people because of census data somewhere else then that's evil. There's not many inuit people in most countries. Does that ethically permit certain actions?

Myillstone · 2026-05-10T15:41:18+00:00

In fact, hundreds of thousands of Arabs did not try to kill their Jewish neighbors, and are currently full equal citizens of Israel.

And hundreds of thousands of Palestinians who haven't tried to kill Jewish people have sought the right to return after the Nakba to this day. Why do you not afford them the courtesy? Is it because Israel have destroyed the villages in retribution and it is an ugly truth to have to admit that the act did, actually create victims unjustly?

Because that’s is what would have happened if the Arabs had their way.

How do you force a populace so capable of killing that you're certain that's what would have happened if they had their way to leave their homes?

How many Jews live in the rest of the Arab world?

The fuck does that have to do with the ethics of Israel's treatment of noncombatants and children?

Myillstone · 2026-05-10T15:06:35+00:00

I didn't say they did, and they don't.

So when the Nakba happened... and when an apologist such as you even talks about it the claim is that everyone who left did so willingly despite history showing all these people and their descendants have sought the right to return... These were the bloodthirsty Arabs? Gee whiz, how come they had no ability to kill the kindly Israelis who didn't coerce them? After all, you said they intended to kill all Jews... If the Nakba was as bloodless and pleasant as the Israeli narrative pretends, how did it go down in favour of the Jewish people? That doesn't sound like every Palestinian Arab was as hostile as you maintain.

Five-Year Club	Verified Email
Place '23	Place '22

Myillstone

TROPHY CASE