3 ms·

I am not going to let you snake around. I can see the slithering. You have not demonstrated how you have brought any evidence that Islam calls for unrestricted

I am not going to let you snake around. I can see the slithering. You have not demonstrated how you have brought any evidence that Islam calls for unrestricted violence against Jews or any people.

nailer 1y ago
But you do remember me mentioning your beliefs about fighting Jews at the end of time and traitorous bushes right? Here is a link: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44351856 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44351856 You specifically asked me to put up or shut up and I put up and then you got very angry about it. Surely you must remember?
- handfuloflight 1y ago
  How does that demonstrate that Islam sanctions unrestricted violence against Jews? Are you aware of what the term "unrestricted violence" means? Do you think that Jews are able to behave without impunity, and if the Muslims have cause to retaliate against them, that means that Islam sanctions unrestricted violence against Jews?
  - nailer 1y ago
    So you do believe you will fight Jews at the end of time, but dispute that this is a call for unrestricted violence? Do you think it’s a call for… a more restricted violence? It is the end of time - I would assume your intentions are to really make it count. I believe anyone is allowed to behave as they reasonably want, including pointing out all the illness Islam has borne onto the world, for Muslims, for Jews, for Christians, for women, for journalists, for intellectuals and for everyone else. And you still haven’t responded to the original accusation of no true Scotsman.
    - deleted 1y ago
      [deleted]
    - deleted 1y ago
      [deleted]
    - handfuloflight 1y ago
      According to the ahadith, a minority of Jews will ally with the false Messiah and persecute people throughout the world and cause corruption; and it will be this group that the Muslims will fight. Nothing about this calls for unrestricted violence. > And you still haven’t responded to the original accusation of no true Scotsman. I've already rebutted that, you only returned with an ipse dixit to say "no but actually Islam is really violent." What we're discussing here is towards deconstructing that point, so also rendering the claim of no true scotsman a moot point (doubly so). Because you will never be able to make the leap from "Islam allows for violence in limited cases, such as cases of persecution and self defense" to "Islam is violent," without bastardizing disengenuity. Also, you are quite the hypocrite aren't you? You repeatedly press me to respond to points (even after I responded to them), yet there is a multitude of points of mine that you left unaddressed, even stating that you're going to ignore them, giving me triple (clearly emotionally charged ragequitting) goodbyes, and then coming back to spew more garbage. Is that why you slid away from the other thread to this one, so people who do not catch that thread do not see your manifest impotencies?
      - nailer 1y ago
        > a minority of Jews will ally with the false Messiah and persecute people throughout the world and cause corruption finally, you’ve responded to the point. This isn’t in the text and is your own personal reading. But at least you’ve acknowledged it exists unlike previously: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44351915 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44351915 > I've already rebutted that No you haven’t rebutted either example of me pointing out your 'no true Scotsman' fallacy. In https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44350839 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44350839 you just wrote 'no u' - that's 'tu quoque', another logical fallacy. If it’s unclear, I am not stating Islam is only violent because the text is violent. I think you might be trying to refute a point I’m not making. There were many reasons why Islam is violent. What do you think causes Islamic violence? > I am not going to let you snake around. I can see the slithering. > Is that why you slid away from the other thread to this one You insult people like a medieval wizard. Did I forget to read one of your posts on the other thread? I’m sorry, I clearly missed out. I’m on this thread reminding you of a second instance of you using the no true Scotsman fallacy. Here is a link to refresh your memory: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44372664 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44372664

I am not going to let you snake around. I can see the slithering. You have not demonstrated how you have brought any evidence that Islam calls for unrestricted violence against Jews or any people.

nailer 1y ago

But you do remember me mentioning your beliefs about fighting Jews at the end of time and traitorous bushes right? Here is a link: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44351856 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44351856 You specifically asked me to put up or shut up and I put up and then you got very angry about it. Surely you must remember?

handfuloflight 1y ago
How does that demonstrate that Islam sanctions unrestricted violence against Jews? Are you aware of what the term "unrestricted violence" means? Do you think that Jews are able to behave without impunity, and if the Muslims have cause to retaliate against them, that means that Islam sanctions unrestricted violence against Jews?
- nailer 1y ago
  So you do believe you will fight Jews at the end of time, but dispute that this is a call for unrestricted violence? Do you think it’s a call for… a more restricted violence? It is the end of time - I would assume your intentions are to really make it count. I believe anyone is allowed to behave as they reasonably want, including pointing out all the illness Islam has borne onto the world, for Muslims, for Jews, for Christians, for women, for journalists, for intellectuals and for everyone else. And you still haven’t responded to the original accusation of no true Scotsman.
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
  - handfuloflight 1y ago
    According to the ahadith, a minority of Jews will ally with the false Messiah and persecute people throughout the world and cause corruption; and it will be this group that the Muslims will fight. Nothing about this calls for unrestricted violence. > And you still haven’t responded to the original accusation of no true Scotsman. I've already rebutted that, you only returned with an ipse dixit to say "no but actually Islam is really violent." What we're discussing here is towards deconstructing that point, so also rendering the claim of no true scotsman a moot point (doubly so). Because you will never be able to make the leap from "Islam allows for violence in limited cases, such as cases of persecution and self defense" to "Islam is violent," without bastardizing disengenuity. Also, you are quite the hypocrite aren't you? You repeatedly press me to respond to points (even after I responded to them), yet there is a multitude of points of mine that you left unaddressed, even stating that you're going to ignore them, giving me triple (clearly emotionally charged ragequitting) goodbyes, and then coming back to spew more garbage. Is that why you slid away from the other thread to this one, so people who do not catch that thread do not see your manifest impotencies?
    - nailer 1y ago
      > a minority of Jews will ally with the false Messiah and persecute people throughout the world and cause corruption finally, you’ve responded to the point. This isn’t in the text and is your own personal reading. But at least you’ve acknowledged it exists unlike previously: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44351915 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44351915 > I've already rebutted that No you haven’t rebutted either example of me pointing out your 'no true Scotsman' fallacy. In https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44350839 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44350839 you just wrote 'no u' - that's 'tu quoque', another logical fallacy. If it’s unclear, I am not stating Islam is only violent because the text is violent. I think you might be trying to refute a point I’m not making. There were many reasons why Islam is violent. What do you think causes Islamic violence? > I am not going to let you snake around. I can see the slithering. > Is that why you slid away from the other thread to this one You insult people like a medieval wizard. Did I forget to read one of your posts on the other thread? I’m sorry, I clearly missed out. I’m on this thread reminding you of a second instance of you using the no true Scotsman fallacy. Here is a link to refresh your memory: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44372664 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44372664