.@pierbove @GodfreyElfwick @ImLiterallyBen A deeper point though: The fact people are legitimately buying this says a lot about the piece.
-
-
Replying to @Intrinsic29
.
@pierbove@GodfreyElfwick@ImLiterallyBen "Indistinguishable from parody," literally.1 reply 1 retweet 28 likes -
Replying to @Intrinsic29 @pierbove and
I find it very plausible. It does come across very tongue-in-cheek in Elfwick style.
2 replies 0 retweets 12 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose @pierbove and
Yeah, definitely plausible. The reason I don't buy it is lack of conclusive evidence.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @Intrinsic29 @pierbove and
Sure. I'm still going with it being tongue-in-cheek rather than sincere tho.
3 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose @Intrinsic29
Discerning truth from satire online is like trying to find out how many layers deep the poison chalice swap went.pic.twitter.com/vKmWdvmHkO
1 reply 1 retweet 8 likes -
Replying to @Makofueled @Intrinsic29
Yeah but I think if it had really intended to make the argument wld have been some stuff abt hating Muslims
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
rather than 'diplomatically expressed negative sentiments abt Islam.' Wld have been just as easy.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
-
Replying to @Intrinsic29 @Makofueled
And "We shld be able to discuss these things w/out being called racist & bigot.' Regressive left pretends that's OK
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
It says 'Criticism & discussion of Islam is fine. Demonising muslims isn't.' Then calls examples of 1st the 2nd.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.