First you urgently need to attend a grammar class to learn the meaning of the word apology.
Alrights lets hear it.
But I won't let you accuse me like this.
accuse- to charge with a fault or offense : blame
Please specify what (baseless) accusation I made against you. I highlighted how careful one must be before making hasty conclusions about another persons so called ''personal beliefs'' and immediately jumping the gun to call him an N-word (the other less popular one) infront of a community of 13000 people.
apologist-someone who speaks or writes in defense of someone or something that is typically controversial, unpopular, or subject to criticism
I think there is a big difference between
trivializing and being an
apologizer for such a thing. Both are bad, but not on the same level. Otherwise, the juidicary system (especially in Germany) would have a hard time filling their prisons with adolescents that carelessly used lingo linked to the bad guys, without harboring sympathies for said ideologies. Guilt by association and faulty syllogisms on your part. Worst of all, good intentioned people like you will end up trivializing said atrocities and the impact it had on the respective communities, by confounding the meaning of the two words.
Then conveniently you ignore the number 88 in reference to the Nazi salute, the phonetic similarity between "Adolf Hitler" and "Adolf Eitler" and ignore the relationship between all the facts cited.
+
There were so many lucid and responsible comments alerting to the seriousness of the problem, you decided to ignore them all
Did I? I was unaware that you know how I feel about this issue. On one hand, I should be shocked about the amount of (baseless) assumptions you have about my emotional and cognitive abilities. On the other hand, looking at the amount of personal attacks, circular reasoning, and other rhetorical fallacies you have committed already, I won't even bother to ''speak in the wind'' (German expression).
and accuse me of persecuting this unhappy Nazi being.
Take a deep breath. Read the sentence again. Breathe again. Re-read it once more. If you don't see the problematic essence of that sentence (attribute grammar to name one), then I won't even bother. You're well intentioned, but the logical and cognitive distortions are too much to bear, even for me.
I didn't make this post against person A or B.
I stop here. You have adequate reading and writing skills, but you have demonstrated an ineptitude in understanding the issue at hand. You're deceitful in your argumentation, and worst of all, dishonest towards yourself. If you had started your argument with ''dissemination'' of hate speech or symbols, then we most definitely would have gotten somewhere. And even in such a case, to put dissemination of hate speech on par with ''apologists''.... that's something. Besides... if you're familiar with ''slander or defamation'', then I would be very careful in what I was saying.
If you're truly interested in making a change, contact the BB's. Otherwise, this conversation is redundant, and shot blocking posts give me less existential dread than the calumnious drivel that you re spreading. Now if you'll excuse me, I'll get back to my duolingo classes with optional grammar courses.
P.S. To the ADL, I do not condone any hate crimes, but I also do not condone dishonest discourse.