I saw this post from a Muslim-defending turdling over here.

"The age of terrorism began in 1914. Our current world was launched into its present form by a single of terror, committed by the Bosnian Gavrilo Princip."

So, let's form a hierarchy chain of events in order to point out who is Literally Hitler vs. Literally Totes Not Hitler. Shorthand; Mohammed is Literally Hitler, SocJus is Literally Totes Not Hitler. D00d shouldn't have noted this event, cuz here I am, gonna destroy ya yet again.

Starting point: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhamed_Mehmedbašić
1. A member of Bosnia's Muslim aristocracy.
2. Killed by organization of retards called Ustaše.
3. Ustaše promoted genocide of Jews
4. They declared that the Catholic and Muslim faiths were le religions of the Croatian people.
5. Leader shook hands with Hitler.

Now, obvs this translates to, "Muslims had nothing to do with the Holocaust and nothing to do with terrorism." Chain of thought from SocJus: Muslim helps 'start this terrorism', but is subsequently completely ignored by acting like Princip acted alone. Note the use in SocJus from "our" initial turdling; "single of terror" *Ahem*, "The terrorist acted alone." Obvs it actually means he was actually single, cuz it's always those lonely betas who can't get laid who attempt to kill peeps.

The Muzzie was obvs just forced to be there by those racists and is a victim who acted in self-defense. All jihad is in self-defense, don't you remember?

Now, this is the thing SocJus refuses to acknowledge; NatSocs praise Muslims when they note the killing of Jews & gays and act like, "we should be more like them". That's their literal sentiment. SocJus praises Muslims when they want "muh diversity" & anti-Hitler whining. NatSocs & SocJus completely ignore they share a common slate in treating Muslimz like they're "useful idiots" that they could just use for their own political gain. Everyone with "Socialist" in their name is completely unaware of how utterly retarded they are by selectively picking which side of the political spectrum one of these rejects might adhere to.

The common theme, of course, being Nationalism vs. Internationalism.
'Ere's ze reality: Jihad vs. Jihad. Le Reason: border control.

In essence, take a guess which side Literally Ustaše would pick vs. who Literally Totes Not Hitler would pick. Of c0urse, this is in between killing those pesky kafirs. It seems like Literally Mohammad wasn't clear in whether or not his ******** descendants should pick border control or not. I already asked ya why the ***** weren't going into other Muslim countries for safety, but apparently, Islam can do no wrong & has nothing to do with anything.

So, when a Mudskin goes ape s**t all over France or wherever, can someone tell me what the motive is? Ya seem pretty positive it has nothing to do with Islam, but I couldn't possibly tell ya he was a Nationalist, could I? I mean, if ya take advantage of a country with an internationalist border policy, ya totes have nothing ta do with being Literally Hitler.

Then again, you should probably thank one of Hitler's henchmen for killing this Mohamed Basic person who was behind the terrorism of Franzo Ferdinando, amirite? You should thank Ustaše for killing that terrorist, mang. O' course, SocJus still thinks they have nothing in common with NatSocs: "The Ustaše, like fascists, promoted a corporatist economy."

Of course, the narrative is that the amount of Muslims who have caused terrorism is a REEEEEEEEEEEEEEALLY tiny amount, right? Soopah tiny; Hitler never showed favoritism for his ******** cousins, amirite? Well, so long as they were Muslim Nationalists, th0. The other guys were like completely evil or something; probs wanted that "diversity" thing.

O' course, it amazes me how peeps argue Hitler wasn't a True Christian or whatever, but since arguing over that is completely tired, let's just see what his Ustaše gang was. The sentiment from many Rightists is this:
1. State Sponsored Christianity or die.
2. Liberals should be imprisoned, killed or thrown in 'therapy'.
3. Secularism is cancer.
4. Protestants suck, t00.

This is always from "True Christians". "True Christians" state that because Hitler threw other retarded Christians in prison that it means he wasn't a True Christian, as if they don't pick favoritism for Le South during Le 'Murican Civil War during their Deth Brigade of North Christfags vs. South Christfags.

From Le Ustaše Skum: "All in all, Croats and Serbs are of two worlds, northpole and southpole, never will they be able to get together unless by a miracle of God. The schism (between the Catholic Church and Eastern Orthodoxy) is the greatest curse in Europe, almost greater than Protestantism. Here there is no moral, no principles, no truth, no justice, no honesty."

Ah, Eastern Orthodoxy and Protestants are the Secularist Libruls in this here scenario, proving that their advocacy for the deth of Libruls ignores that librulism includes Christfags. So yes, they are Literally Ustaše, which by extension proves they're lying about having Hitler's exact intentions.

"But but, imprisoning Christians actually means you're against Christianity!1!"
^Literally Liars. He imprisoned exactly who they wanted imprisoned; "All Libruls". Ironically, peeps somehow think they won't be burning down churches under anyone who is like Hitler. "True Christian" doesn't hurt Christians, you say? Well, True Christians advocate Gawd's Law, meaning you're just as much of heathens as the gays you protect from Gawd's Law. Buuuuuut, keep saying they're not the True Chosen Ones while y'all keep claiming you're the Truer Ones.

Oh, but that 'racism' against Muslims? I know, mang, attacking retards for being retards is totes racism & hyper uber omega final turbo nationalism. I get it; your grasp on historical context is nonexistent compared to a basement dweller.