• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

What is Wrong With Jews Who Repeatedly Post the Most Hateful Propaganda Towards Muslims?

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber
When one group (in this case Muslims) is known for desiring your death and calling you all sorts of nasty things, can you blame the other group (Jews) for not being very happy about it?
such as ISIS at the present time.
ISIS is one the West does have to take credit for, much like America pretty much has to take credit for Bin Laden and Al Qaeda ascending to the position/power they had due to support in arms and money from America/Reagan.
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
To a point. But the people fighting on both sides are still Muslims, despite frequent appeals to No True Scotsman fallacies.

Edited to add: besides being a classical example of the NTS fallacy, appeals to admission that ISIS and similar groups are "obviously not Muslims" suffer from another serious flaw.

Most Muslims consider it rude, if not all-out religiously unadvisable, to state directly that someone who claims to be a Muslim is in fact not a Muslim.

Yet the most common comment by Muslims when ISIS is brought to discussion is that they are "clearly" non-Muslims and, in fact, opposed to Islaam despite their own passionate, dedicated claims.

If non-Muslims are supposed to carry the very troublesome burden of deciding who qualifies as a Muslim and dealing with the necessary consequences without any significant support from Muslims, then it must then follow that Islaam has no sovereignity whatsoever, no authority over even itself.

And in that case, there is no justification whatsover for any complaints about lack of proper respect towards Islaam. Respect is only justifiable when the object of that respect accepts its own responsibility over itself.
 
Last edited:

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
I never said all Muslim leaders.

Nor did you indicate otherwise and to put forward your argument you accused me of straw man argument. What you write was
" My claim was that Muslim leaders worked with and liked the Nazis and the Nazi ideology. Arab leaders did a great deal to help Hitler back then."
 

leibowde84

Veteran Member
Nor did you indicate otherwise and to put forward your argument you accused me of straw man argument. What you write was
" My claim was that Muslim leaders worked with and liked the Nazis and the Nazi ideology. Arab leaders did a great deal to help Hitler back then."
My claim is true. Muslim leaders did side with the Nazis. Not all of them, obviously. But Muslim leaders did.
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
My claim is true. Muslim leaders did side with the Nazis. Not all of them, obviously. But Muslim leaders did.
And it must be pointed out that this is no strawman. Quite on the contrary.

Much as many people wish it were otherwise now, there is no significant controversy on the matter of support of Muslim leaders towards the Nazi regime, explicitly on grounds of common interest in solving the "Jewish question".

Amin al-Husseini, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem at the time, was very much an Arab nationalist and an anti-Zionist who sought and to a considerable extent obtained Hitler's support for those causes. That is very well documented and beyond serious question, however much we might wish it were not the case.

More to the point, then as now there was a very significant absence of serious challenge to those dangerous views from within the Muslim community.
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
That article is seriously, seriously biased towards protecting the memory of Islaam at the expense of accuracy and integrity.

I wonder if it would even be possible to write it, even in this desperately partial form that it currently has, were it not for the fact that British India had a sizeable minority of Muslims to provide the numbers for his claims.

Of course, since WW2 there was the Partition that gave many of those same Muslims their own political autonomy in the form of Pakistan (and later Bangladesh).

If that history taught us anything, it is that Muslim politics are inherently ravenous and everyone should be wary of them.
 

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
My claim is true. Muslim leaders did side with the Nazis. Not all of them, obviously. But Muslim leaders did.

Correct, not all of them so in fact, some Muslim leaders sided with Hitler and some didn't in the same way some Europeans sudd wirth Hitler and some didnt
 

leibowde84

Veteran Member
Correct, not all of them so in fact, some Muslim leaders sided with Hitler and some didn't in the same way some Europeans sudd wirth Hitler and some didnt
So, apart from the troops mentioned in the article you cited, what Muslim leaders stood up and explicitly fought against the ideals of naziism and antisemitism?
 

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
What leaders listed in your wikipedia cite were "Muslim leaders" not under control of Western Empires?

Why are you changing goalposts, creating new challenges brcause your old one was shown to be faulty.

Each were leaders of their own country, as you asked. Who they held allegiance to was allies
 

leibowde84

Veteran Member
Why are you changing goalposts, creating new challenges brcause your old one was shown to be faulty.

Each were leaders of their own country, as you asked. Who they held allegiance to was allies
No, I'm asking which Muslim leaders. The list you provided from Wikipedia did not specify what leaders were Muslim leaders. I am honestly asking you which were Muslim leaders from your list.
 
Top