Could be wrong but from reading that I didn't get the impression that he necessarily thinks we're ruled by Muslims but that their version of history is the one pushed as the truth even though it isn't which could come about in numerous ways like most fake history. As it's an anti-white and anti-Christian version of history that's pushed by making the muslims the victims it would seem that a lot of potential groups would benefit from pushing the narrative.
That interpretation I find fair enough, it’s just he called them the victors (as in history is written by the victors) of some imaginary takeover of europe/the West so I think there’s some daylight between you two
I see how it could be interpreted that way, can't say I've ever seen someone advocate for a secret society of muslims ruling the world but it'd probably be an interesting read if that is what he meant. Though I doubt there's much if any information to support such a conspiracy.
I never suggested anything of the sort. Why are you creating a strawman? Do you think I am so stupid it will work or are you so stupid you think it will work? Either way it is incredibly insulting. You do not post trying to have an honest discussion and use logical fallacies.
That’s how I read it, mainly because of this part:
But college will tell you it was a peaceful time and the islam invadors let the europeans live their lives, which wasn't further from the truth. You had to submit by either converting or paying them a tax. Or you know you die.
That is a reset because the victors(islam) have rewritten history and brainwash children everyday. That is why the crusades are regarded as a horrible thing, when they were literally a response to an islamic invasion
That is the most retarded logic I have ever heard. Because islam conquered most of europe in the middle ages they control the entire world today is your assertion.
Are you seriously suggesting the modern world is run by muslims? My guy...lol
Could be wrong but from reading that I didn't get the impression that he necessarily thinks we're ruled by Muslims but that their version of history is the one pushed as the truth even though it isn't which could come about in numerous ways like most fake history. As it's an anti-white and anti-Christian version of history that's pushed by making the muslims the victims it would seem that a lot of potential groups would benefit from pushing the narrative.
That interpretation I find fair enough, it’s just he called them the victors (as in history is written by the victors) of some imaginary takeover of europe/the West so I think there’s some daylight between you two
I see how it could be interpreted that way, can't say I've ever seen someone advocate for a secret society of muslims ruling the world but it'd probably be an interesting read if that is what he meant. Though I doubt there's much if any information to support such a conspiracy.
I never suggested anything of the sort. Why are you creating a strawman? Do you think I am so stupid it will work or are you so stupid you think it will work? Either way it is incredibly insulting. You do not post trying to have an honest discussion and use logical fallacies.
That’s how I read it, mainly because of this part:
That is the most retarded logic I have ever heard. Because islam conquered most of europe in the middle ages they control the entire world today is your assertion.
Retarded. So are you really this dumb?
Lmfao you’re a huge faggot, you’re the one who said it, not my fault your writing is fucking nonsensical gibberish