Thread was closed for some reason for but Zach, FFS you can't be for real with this...
You don't care who wrote it but what it says? When who writes it defines what it says most of the time? Are you fucking kidding me? How did you survive a day in school? Or source is fine as long as it fits your lazy agenda?
This is no neutral fact based reuters source, you litterally chose the worst possible source about Muslims in Europe, a outright islmsphobic fascist bigot organization as source, that spends millions across nations to spread their hateful agenda, they give money for ppl to literally sound like Nazis in their descriptions of Muslims, and you don't care? You for real?
What's next, next time you discuss black Americans you gonna link us KKK sources and pass it off as legit?
Skickat från min SM-G930F via Tapatalk
Osman, relax man. You must have missed my post.
My sources are in dutch, which is the national news media and supposedly the best quality one in Belgium. So i wanted an english one, but got very lazy and took the first one of which the content was fitting with what i've read in said dutch media.
If i didnt have dutch media to base on, i would have checked the source yes.
Question, if the KKK source says
"you can recognice the african american by its darker pigmentation"
And this matches what i read in my dutch biology book
Yeah, i might link it.
But i understand your concern and its a fair point.