Misconceptions about Islam

[Muslimwoman]

go on then brian educate me on this, perhaps you should start a new thread though.

You could try addressing the issue I posted ..... Bosnia. Thre is zero doubt tat they were Christians and yes they were killing in the name of Jesus.

 

[enlightenment]

I really do not think that Israel can take the moral high ground over 'terrorism'.

Truth be told, the very state of Israel was actually established on the foundations of terrorism, by groups like Irn Gun and the Stern Gang. These Zionist terrorists were around long before Islamic terrorists were the new bogeyman of the West, yet this is bypassed in history.

How often are people taught about what happened to the Liberty, the US ship which many well placed people believe was destroyed by the Israeli's, and then a cover up attempt was carried out.

We are rarely told about the events leading up to the King David hotel.

And Israel are culpable of other acts of 'terrorism' since then.

Only recently they attacked an aid ship, on international waters, and they butchered those on the ship, then tried to lay the blame on those on the ship.

Only the gullible would buy that account, yet, incredibly, Israel are permitted to investigate itself, and, surprise surprise, Israel find that Israel has done nothing wrong.

What a joke, so it is little wonder that people, not just Arabs and Muslims, that this tiny and artificial state is given treatment that would be afforded to no other state or nation.

We wring our hands at Gadaffi, and call him a tyrant for hiring mercenaries to gun down protestors.

Spend half an hour reading up on how various Israeli Governments have treated and ill treated their Palestinian neighbours, then tell me that you can criticise one and not the other?

If anything, the Mad Col is chickenfeed when compared to the sheer scale of the blood letting and bulldozing that Israel have done, for decades.

And they then wonder why an organisation like Hamas might evolve, and gain support????

Are they kidding?

If you are going to take the piss out of a group of people, time and again, then when they get a chance, that group of people are going to support any group that offers them some measure of revenge and protection.

If that happens to be Hamas, then so be it as far as they are concerned.

Some say that were it not for their presence, the Israeli treatment of the Palestinians would be even more brutal than it has been, to date.

There do exist deniers, those who are apologists for the 'policies' of Israel, and they can often be found on message boards.

They remind me of Nazi holocaust deniers, indeed if you read posts by both types, you soon see a theme in how they dismiss facts, evidence, and reality.

They have their own version of reality, and are not really interested in altering that, even with better information.

These people will tell you that Israel are not persecuting the Palestinians at all, and are merely defending themselves, and how Israel want a peaceful outcome, when we all know that what Israel want is the total removal of an entire ethnic group. It would suit the Israeli's just fine if refuge were given to all Palestinians, by another nation. It would also suit them just fine if the rest of the world looked away, while they carried out a systematic genocide of a native people.

Remember, if the UN call something a genocide, or an attempted one, they are OBLIGATED to take action on the nation deemed to be engaged in the action. In other words, if the UN announced that Israel were involved in the systematic destruction of a people, it would have to take possibly military action against Israel, and since the UN is just a puppet organisation, and Israel are too arrogant to accept UN directives, there is no way that this UN are going to formally declare a genocide, because that would mean that the puppet needed to attack it's own hand...

 

[Muslimwoman]

There seems to be a feeling among many British people that there is a concentrated effort to Islamify the UK, with a view to making up the bulk of the population, at least in certain towns and cities.

I've already posted information to show the fear of Muslims "breeding" to take over the UK is nonesense. Immigration is an issue of course, as Muslims tend to only marry other Muslims from 'back home'. This means we issue 1 visa and in 10 years that has extended to an entire family. However they generally migrate for economic reasons and not to Islamify the West.

This would be with a view to the long term goal of extending the power that the Sharia courts here already have, as well as introducing a more Islamic culture.

I have never heard a muslim say they want sharia law here ... although to be fair I don't hang out in radical mosques and don't live in a large city with an entire Muslim community. I am sure there are areas here where people call for such things but do I believe there is a systematic endeavour by immigrant Muslims to slowly bring in sharia (for all aspects of life and not just family matters like divorce and inheritence) ... nah.

With Islam being the fastest growing religion in the world, is there just cause to feel that Muslims wish to (at least in part) Islamify the UK, and perhaps use pressure to see that given laws are favourable to them?

As the EDL are one of the fasted growing political parties in the UK, is there just cause to feel that the British wish to exterminate Muslims and Islam? Both questions are far too general.

Of course there are Muslims here who wish to bring in sharia, hold regular beheadings in Trafalgar Square and make non-Muslims pay jizya ... there are also plenty of Muslims out getting drunk and sleeping around ... and of course the vast majority are smack bang in the middle, having no desire to Islamify the UK, they just want to be allowed to live as Muslims here.

Most Muslims here are grateful for the life they have been able to build here, they have no desire to change our country as they accept it a host nation with it's own laws and customs. Do some want to see laws favourable to them .. of course, but which group of society doesn't?

 

[enlightenment]

Do you see a contradiction though.

Of all the religions, it appears to many that those most likely to take offence, sometimes violently, are Muslims.

It is hard to imagine someone being on the wrong end of a death wish, for drawing cartoons of Moses or Jesus, for example, and yet, the same thing has caused some Muslims to threaten the life of the illustrator.

There are not too many occasions in which a man has needed to go into recluse mode for merely writing a novel, that man being Salman Rushide. I would be amazed, for instance, if Richard Dawkins found himself in need of taking refuge, for his often scathing attacks on Christianity.

Most times I find myself defending the Muslim people, mainly because I feel they are often misrepresented, however, when some engage in actions such as that, it just makes it harder to do so, because more of the masses can point to such things and shout 'LOOK - THEY ARE GOING TO KILL SOMEONE FOR WRITING A BOOK'.

I do feel that too much slack has been given to radical Islamists on the streets of British cities. If they are grateful to be part of a Western culture, then perhaps the best way to show that isn't to take to the streets, and offend it? Again, when some British Muslims do that, it simply makes the like of the EDL or the BNP appeal even more to British youth.

 

[bob x]

I simply want to establish whether these attacks were against Israeli's or Jews as worldwide nation of people...

Buenos Aires Cultural Centre - The AMIA bombing was an attack on the Argentine Israelite Mutual Association building

"Israelite" here just means "Jew", as in:

Istanbul Consulate - not sure if you mean 2003 or 2008 bombings or both .. the 2003 bombings were against a number of targets including Bet Israel and Neve Shalom synagogues

For "Aaronsdad" (a friend of mine on another board), the Munich Olympics was to him what the RFK murder was to me, the incident that made him a determined enemy of the Palestinians for life. You put this in the category of "they were just attacking Israelis", but the Olympics were where the world tries to put that kind of crap aside, just for a few days OK? Aaronsdad saw it as an attack on the entire world. For another friend, the definitive atrocity was the Achille Lauro, which I somehow left off the list: not just the baseness of shoving an old man in a wheelchair into the sea, but the celebration of it. There was also that hijacking (1980?) where the plane was forced back and forth between Beirut and Algiers a couple times, and the hijacking kept demanding to know which passengers were Jewish, so they could know who to shoot and drop on the tarmac.

Husseini would have made a pact with satan himself if it meant stopping immigration and the creation of a "Jewish National Home" in Palestine. What's that saying ... my enemies enemy is my friend?!

Are you going to pretend Husseini found Hitler satanic, and was really reluctant to ally with such a one? I will try to dig up the incident where he quarreled with the Nazis over their reluctance to kill Jews: a bunch of Jews had been rounded up and were deported, instead of all being shot, and Husseini was upset about that (this was before the "Final Solution" decision, obviously).

Immigration is an issue of course...
I have never heard a muslim say they want sharia law here ...

SOME people have heard Muslims say such things-- therefore, the response to the immigration issue is to start murdering random Muslims, starting of course with Muslims who have nothing to do with any calls for sharia law, to make sure it is perfectly understood that all Muslims are the enemy. That's the approach that you have already endorsed, right?

 

[Vajradhara]

Salaam Sally,

thank you for the post. sorry for the tardy reply, i've not been myself of late.

I can understand your feeling on the subject. Allah (swt) does say it is better for women to remain in the home (ie being wives and mothers) but there is nothing to prohibit their working. Indeed, as more women in Mid East countries are educated more choose to go out and work but those without a husband and children to feed have always been able to work and provide for their families.

i must wonder if you can understand my feelings on this given as i don't believe in a creator deity and therefore have no option but to view Al Qur'an as something different than a Muslim does which, naturally, engenders different emotive responses

could you elaborate a bit on what it means to be better for a woman to remain in the home? better in what manner?

i knew many Libyan women that did that very thing and, clearly, lots of countries have lots of men dying so the reality of the situation is what it is and i'm not disputing that. there are two terms that are apropos here, de facto and de jeur. i understand the de jeur exposition of Islam vis a vie women and i understand the de facto reality of a large group of women living in Islamic societies.

The Quran is written for all time, it is up to us (the people) to form our lives within it's limits. I accept that has and still is in many instances working against women because it's men who interpret the faith but that is the fault of people, not of Allah (swt) or the Quran.

i completely agree that people can take something which is perfectly clear and muddy it all up and end up doing crazy things which seem quite out of context. i'm glad that we agree on this vital point.

Exactly and the Quran simply points out that someone who does something freely is different from someone who is forced .. I don't see the problem with that.

no problem with that stand alone sentiment.

i'm wondering how it is that you're not agreeing with me when i'm quoting the ayat itself and simply copypasta the text here. there are two clauses in the ayat where we're talking and you're focused on the first and i'm focused on the second. i grant the first clause to you, can you grant the second clause to me? if so, since we agree on the first clause i'd rather talk about the second one if we can.

I don't understand what you are having difficulty with here. Let's try it another way.

In the UK in 2011 the law clearly says DO NOT force someone into the sex trade.

Are you content to simply leave it there or do you accept it was right to enshrine in our laws a punishment if this law was broken?

please don't be patronizing.

..... And do not compel your slave girls to prostitution, if they desire chastity, to seek [thereby] the temporary interests of worldly life. And if someone should compel them, then indeed, Allah is [to them], after their compulsion, Forgiving and Merciful. (24:33)

Where does it say men may (as in allowed) to force them? It is very clear, men are not allowed to force women BUT if a man chooses to ignore the prohibition of forcing women into prostitution there is no sin on the woman.

sally, i'm not sure what to say to you. do you know what the word "if" signifies in that sentence? "...if they seek chastity," do you understand the implications of this is that there are slave girls (and why are their slave girls sally?) that may *not* seek chastity (which isn't expounded in any great detail i might add) and ipso facto can be forced into prostitution?

if you cannot agree on this then i really don't think that we can make any further progress in our discussion until this is resolved between us. it seems such an obvious, blatant, exemption that i find it hard to understand how an obviously intelligent woman such as yourself would support it.

and yet elite athletes (again I mention them because they are men and women at their peak physical abilities) cannot compete on an equal level ... can you explain why?

the articles written by the doctors and all that which i linked to is a far better source for this but i'll sum it up. Muscles of same size=same strength. men and women of same size, training etc = same strength. Avg male height 5'10", avg female height 5' 4". avg height difference 6".... i think you can see where this train is headed so i'll just get to the station. men are typically larger than women and thus stronger. a larger woman is stronger than a smaller man. woman and man of same size=same strength.

I simply cannot agree with you. Islam was radically before it's time in offering women's rights, the fact that Muslim men have chosen to steamroller over those rights is certainly not "tacit permission" by Islam for the mistreatment of women ... it's just pig ignorant men playing the "my willy is bigger than your willy game". If you want to lay blame put it where it belongs .. with men, not God.

lacking a requisite belief in God makes such things rather problematic sally, wouldn't you agree?

when you fall back upon God as part of our discussion it leaves all realm of rational discourse for me as i lack that belief structure. in probably the same way that you lack a belief in the Buddhas displays of miraculous power and you find it hard to accord credence to views which rely upon that as their basis.

metta,

~jae

 

[c0de]

(and why are their slave girls sally?)

Do you understand what it meant to be a slave in Arabia, before Islam? Also, do you realize how many actual slaves, and how many more functional slaves exist in the world right now? Even in America?

What I'm tryin' to say is: don't try and score points against the Quran via the slavery issue. I believe the Quran is the greatest boon for "human rights" (actually, I should I say, human privileges) as it regulates inequality, by first recognizing that there will -always- be inequality in one form or another. What it does not do is fall into fantasy, like idealistic libertarian nonsense.

Look dude, some people get the short end of the stick, while others get made kings and queens in this life. There is no point in religious people trying to make excuses for God in this matter. HE is beyond our rationalizations. However, the great thing is, according to my faith, everyone will get their peace eventually. But according to yours, there's nothing for a boy who dies in his teens of leukemia (something that just happened to someone I knew).

So the real question for you should be: How do you live with yourself, knowing how privileged your life is compared to mortals like that? That's what I'd be asking myself if I were you.

 

[bob x]

I will try to dig up the incident where he quarreled with the Nazis over their reluctance to kill Jews...

This does not mention the specific incident I was remembering, but does summarize his career and views. It has a propagandistic axe to grind (the purpose is to defend the Pope), but that can be discounted: I do not see any gross misrepresentations of fact.

 

[enlightenment]

There are some real odious elements in the US and in the UK, who just need a reason to hate - at the moment, Muslims are a handy outlet for them. Before that it would have been black people, in the 60's, with many of the same ill informed fears and scaremongering about them, as there are Muslims today.

You know what, I may not be a religous man, but I respect all living things, including fellow man. And from my perspective, unless we are really careful, when too many moderate people are suckered into buying the rhetoric, it opens up an avenue for a far right and fascistic party to come through, rise to power.

A recent poll already showed that around 60% of people would potentially vote for a far right party, as long as they denounced violent methods.

Many of the accusations and stereotypes about Muslims in 2011 remind me a lot of the accusations and negative stereotypes aimed at the European Jewry, in the 30's. And we all know how that played out, in the end, right..?

If you think that something akin to this cannot happen again, think again.

Remember, the Nazi holocaust is by no means the only holocaust that there has been, albeit it the one that is given most of the spotlight.

We seem to have a bit of a penchant for large scale persecution and killing over anyone who is different to us.

This is why it is important that moderate people always correct what they see as anti Muslim bias, wherever it comes from, for if you fail to do so, then you are just making the job of the agitators ten times more easy.

 

[NiceCupOfTea]

No problem - you're welcome to start one to address any particular issue, and I'll be happy to try and ensure a constructive contribution where possible.

i have no particular issues, but if you have an axe to grind I'd love to hear about it.

 

[iBrian]

There seems to be a feeling among many British people that there is a concentrated effort to Islamify the UK, with a view to making up the bulk of the population, at least in certain towns and cities. This would be with a view to the long term goal of extending the power that the Sharia courts here already have, as well as introducing a more Islamic culture.

I remember living as a student in a predominantly Asian/immigrant area of Preston in the 90's. Families sorted out their own issues of misbehaviour, if there were any.

The only problems I ever saw where the white youths driving in at the weekend to shout abuse at the residents and screech their cars.

From the general experience I learned:

- the Muslim concept of family as an important part of keeping the peace
- people fear what they don't understand
- white fear is as much proactive as reactive

So the Muslims were not looking to inflict anything on anybody, and if anyone within the community stepped out of line, it was expected the family would chastise them.

And they were subject to a constant aggravating racist prejudice. Something that has been conveniently forgotten about.

I remember thinking I'd hate to see what would happen if the Muslim family authority started to break down. The kids might start biting back against the constant oppression British society inflicted on them.

For "Aaronsdad" (a friend of mine on another board)

Oh my goodness - haven't seen Aaronsdad around for years. His kids are probably almost teenagers now. Feel free to point him over here if he ever feels inclined to visit - he was always a welcome poster.

i have no particular issues, but if you have an axe to grind I'd love to hear about it.

None at all here - you simply mentioned you didn't believe Christians had ever killed in the name of Jesus, and then suggested a specific thread on it. Now you're not sure what you want or belief??

 

[NiceCupOfTea]

None at all here - you simply mentioned you didn't believe Christians had ever killed in the name of Jesus, and then suggested a specific thread on it. Now you're not sure what you want or belief??

if you say so.

 

[iBrian]

if you say so.

No, you said so, here:

i am not aware of Christians killing civilians in the name of Jesus,

go on then brian educate me on this, perhaps you should start a new thread though.

i dont really know much about any of those, but things to consider.

were they following the teachings of Jesus ?

were they killing in the name of Jesus ?

and were they Christians ?

I would say the answer to first two is no, as for the last point that harder to say really as there are those who dont consider the catholic church to be christian.

perhaps you could make this a new thread ?

and then you stated:

i have no particular issues, but if you have an axe to grind I'd love to hear about it.

If you want to start a new thread to discuss possible historical examples of Christians actively calling for the death of civilians in the name of Jesus, then you are welcome to start such a topic as you suggested you would.

That's all I was suggesting - that if you're happy to start such a thread it's not a problem, and it tries to keep this thread more focused on the issues of Islam.

 

[NiceCupOfTea]

No, you said so, here:







and then you stated:



If you want to start a new thread to discuss possible historical examples of Christians actively calling for the death of civilians in the name of Jesus, then you are welcome to start such a topic as you suggested you would.

i have no interest really, but if someone has an axe to grind then a new thread would be a good idea.

That's all I was suggesting - that if you're happy to start such a thread it's not a problem, and it tries to keep this thread more focused on the issues of Islam.

i agree i would rather focus on the issues of islam in this thread.

 

[wil]

i have no interest really, but if someone has an axe to grind then a new thread would be a good idea.



i agree i would rather focus on the issues of islam in this thread.

So to be clear....if we talk about 'issues of christianity' someone must have an axe to grind?

But if we focus on the issues of Islam (rather than the misconceptions)....

 

[NiceCupOfTea]

So to be clear....if we talk about 'issues of christianity' someone must have an axe to grind?

But if we focus on the issues of Islam (rather than the misconceptions)....

if you say so wil

 

[Muslimwoman]

Do you see a contradiction though.

It is hard to imagine someone being on the wrong end of a death wish, for drawing cartoons of Moses or Jesus, for example, and yet, the same thing has caused some Muslims to threaten the life of the illustrator.

Contradiction to what? There are radicals, extremists and out and out nutters in Muslim societies, just as there in any portion of a society. I can't explain why they think the way they do and I will not spend my life apologising for them. All I am sure of is that Islam in and of itself does not teach such things.

Take for example the blasphemy laws of Pakistan ... these were actually laws created by the British in India and included punishments for using innuendo to insult religious beliefs. Clauses were then added, by Muslim rulers, to ensure Islam was protected (read that as over protected) under the laws. So these laws have sod all to do with Islam and yet anyone watching the news this week could be forgiven for thinking Islam demands punishments for insults to Islam.

I do feel that too much slack has been given to radical Islamists on the streets of British cities. If they are grateful to be part of a Western culture, then perhaps the best way to show that isn't to take to the streets, and offend it? Again, when some British Muslims do that, it simply makes the like of the EDL or the BNP appeal even more to British youth.

I agree with you. There is a well known picture of women in niqab in London protesting about the cartoons holding signs saying "British police go to hell" ... I've always said revoke their citizenship/visa and stick them on a plane to Saudi. I am also aware that some "Muslim" areas of London have become no go areas but in the early 80's there were no go "black" areas like Brixton. So of course I understand why people get upset or scared but I don't think Islam as a faith is to blame ... look at the above blasphemy issue and then look at how many of the demonstrators in London were from Pakistani descent ... tells a story don't you think?

You put this in the category of "they were just attacking Israelis", but the Olympics were where the world tries to put that kind of crap aside, just for a few days OK?

Sorry but I don't have time to play the twisty turny, keep moving the goal posts game with you.

You wish to assert, and have done many times, that Palestinians are on a crusade to kill all Jews, everywhere. Your evidence for this is a list of terrorist attacks against Jewish targets. When I point out that the targets are virtually all Israeli, rather than simply Jewish, you want to talk about the Olympics being a non-political event

Anyone with half a brain understands the intense hatred of Israel and all things Israeli within Palestine and can see that these attacks are against Israel and not part of a worldwide genocidal plan against Jews for being Jewish. Anti-Israel does not anti-semitism make!!

For another friend, the definitive atrocity was the Achille Lauro, which I somehow left off the list: not just the baseness of shoving an old man in a wheelchair into the sea, but the celebration of it.

Would that be the Palestinian celebration or the Israeli celebration?

"The details of the preparations are related by an insider to the upper echelons of the Israeli secret services, Ari Ben-Menashe, former special intelligence advisor to Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir -in his book, "Profits of War." ... "An example is the case of the "Palestinian" attack on the cruise ship Achille Lauro in 1985. That was in fact, an Israeli "black" propaganda operation to show what a deadly, cutthroat bunch the Palestinians were. " "

Sure enough it was actually the Palestinians who carried out the hijacking and murder but proof of a desire to wipe out all Jews ... I don't think so.

There was also that hijacking (1980?) where the plane was forced back and forth between Beirut and Algiers a couple times, and the hijacking kept demanding to know which passengers were Jewish, so they could know who to shoot and drop on the tarmac.

And yet the only person they shot and dropped to the tarmac was a non Jew and their demands were for the release of Lebanese prisoners and the withdrawal of Israel from Palestine ... oh look there's that Israel word again.

So you're still not making any case for a Palestinian worldwide witch hunt of Jews.

Again none of which is evidence of a Palestinian worldwide genocidal plan to kill all Jews but points to attacks against Israel as a political Jewish state.

Are you going to pretend Husseini found Hitler satanic, and was really reluctant to ally with such a one?

WTF???? How can you possibly twist what I said into this nonsense?

 

[enlightenment]

You wish to assert, and have done many times, that Palestinians are on a crusade to kill all Jews, everywhere. Your evidence for this is a list of terrorist attacks against Jewish targets. When I point out that the targets are virtually all Israeli, rather than simply Jewish, you want to talk about the Olympics being a non-political event

Anyone with half a brain understands the intense hatred of Israel and all things Israeli within Palestine and can see that these attacks are against Israel and not part of a worldwide genocidal plan against Jews for being Jewish. Anti-Israel does not anti-semitism make!!

So true.

It's what he does though.

It's a trick used to stifle debate, and smear others.

Thankfully, this low ruse is usually seen through by the intelligent observer - it has been so overused that people are now seeing it as misrepresentation and manipulation, which is precisely what it IS, because they misrepresent criticism of Israel as being 'an attack on Jews worldwide'. They figure that if this lie is repeated often enough, it transforms into truth - it doesn't, it remains a lie, and one that is being increasingly discredited.

YouTube - "Anti-Semitic,it's a trick we always use it" - Amy Goodman interview Shulamit Aloni

 

[enlightenment]

Contradiction to what? There are radicals, extremists and out and out nutters in Muslim societies, just as there in any portion of a society. I can't explain why they think the way they do and I will not spend my life apologising for them. All I am sure of is that Islam in and of itself does not teach such things.

Take for example the blasphemy laws of Pakistan ... these were actually laws created by the British in India and included punishments for using innuendo to insult religious beliefs. Clauses were then added, by Muslim rulers, to ensure Islam was protected (read that as over protected) under the laws. So these laws have sod all to do with Islam and yet anyone watching the news this week could be forgiven for thinking Islam demands punishments for insults to Islam.

Yes - totally agree that there are the nutters and radicals in other sectors of the community, although I cannot recount anyone threatening someone with death for mocking their ATHEISM? Maybe a wee link there, perhaps?

But you are stating, so that we're clear, that Islam does not in itself, eg; in the Koran, teach reprisals to anyone who insults Mohammed or Allah?

Genuine question.

 

[bob x]

There is a well known picture of women in niqab in London protesting about the cartoons holding signs saying "British police go to hell" ... I've always said revoke their citizenship/visa and stick them on a plane to Saudi.

Why don't you say that this calls for a campaign to kill all Muslims, particularly those not associated with her calls for overthrowing British law? It is the approach to "immigration" questions you endorse in other contexts.

You wish to assert, and have done many times, that Palestinians are on a crusade to kill all Jews, everywhere.

And non-Jews who have any association with Israel.

When I point out that the targets are virtually all Israeli, rather than simply Jewish

The synagogue was called "Beth Israel" (like synagogues in many neighborhoods, including mine), and Argentinians typically use the word "Israelites" for Jews, because Jews have used that name for thousands of years, longer than there have been any Muslims. You have a problem with that?

you want to talk about the Olympics being a non-political event

It is part of the pattern that their murderousness is not just directed at Jews, but at anybody in the world who has normal dealings with Israelis. This is the arch-primitivist tribal mind-set that I abhor, and which has guaranteed them a raft of enemies.

Would that be the Palestinian celebration or the Israeli celebration?

Your attempt to blame-shift here is totally sickening.

And yet the only person they shot and dropped to the tarmac was a non Jew

Because no-one would tell them who the Jews were. They were astonished to find out that American passports do not have an annotation of religion anywhere.

WTF???? How can you possibly twist what I said into this nonsense?

Explain yourself then. What did you mean to say Husseini would make a deal with the devil himself? Husseini dealt with Hitler because they were thoroughly like-minded, their main difference being that Husseini advocated for the Final Solution long before Hitler was ready to go that far.