patrick.net

Wow. This is incredible. Imagine if it was a White Professor calling for the genocide of evil Muslims.

I'm not going to go reading the guy's paper, but there's a difference between calling for genocide, which he does and this justification he provides:

One can certainly concoct a hypothetical scenario in which the deliberate annihilation of a group’s way of life is a “moral and political imperative.”

Sure, there are times when a part of a groups way of life should be anihilated. But you don't kill the groups members. You just force them to stop certain behavior. Interestingly, what is left of white racism is nothing compared to Islamic hatred of others (religious bigotry). Certainly, the really bad apples are small in number on both sides, but western society as a whole rejects racism. Islamic societies do not reject religious bigotry the same way. The strong moral case is for the deliberate annihilation of the kind of religious bigotry that causes terrorism or enforcing religious rules on a larger society.

Considering that he's serious, then we must examine how a white racist is determined. In the past election, voting for Trump was enough to peg someone as a racist or deplorable. Must black organizations view all whites as racist or race ignorant. So in essence, he's calling for genocide against white people. Period.

The why? Well, Muslims have had a death cult ideology since Mohammed crawled out of his yurt and claimed divine revelation. Since then, they've been humiliated by bringing nothing to the world but camel lore and the most backward and vicious religion we know.
On the other side we have white people who have advanced all good things like technology and medicine, philosophy and humanism, science and compassion for others to new heights.
Matched against each other, the clear most valuable group is obvious.

This Muslim has tipped his hand and laid bare his intentions in a most revealing way.