re: #24 CuriousLurker

c. Valid or justifiable: a legitimate complaint.

Exactly. This is the meaning used in the quote to which my comment above applies. Epistemologically the religious claims of ISIS, Kahane and KKK are as “valid” [or not] as the claims of the competing groups. Or, to put it in a fewer words, no one can actually prove one way or another.

If a group of Islamic scholars objects to what ISIS teaches, they’re merely pitting their interpretations against those of ISIS. Same thing happened in history thousands of times (see Catholics v. Protestants, Sunni v. Shia, etc.).

Tommy Robinson is indisputably British. He can put a crown on his head and proclaim himself the King of England, but that doesn’t confer legitimacy on his claim, despite the fact that he is British.

Since [in the context] we’re merely discussing whether he’s as legitimate a Brit as any, yes, of course he is. His hypothetical claim of being a king would perhaps be somewhat (but not completely) analogous to ISIS’ claim that its interpretation is the only true one. Such claims are valid only in the heads of those who make it, indeed.