To want a way to label the reasonable fear of the variety of Islam that wishes to impose Sharia law?

[Oodiks]

I understand that there are different sects within Islam and that while some pose no concerns, others do. I am horrified at the type of Sharia law imposed in Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Afghanistan, which denies women human rights, but it's hard to talk about those reasonable fears without being labelled Islamophobic. It's not unreasonable to fear a religion that imposes such harsh lives on women.

Yes I did. One picture i noted was of Police dealing with a lady wearing a poppy and swastika on her t shirt. She was a white lady with no obvious Islamic attire so not sure why up thread someone implied Muslims were marching with swastikas. Looked like an isolated event. Of course you'll get few nutters and wrong uns in any mass gathering.

See my comment about the left marching alongside Islamic extremists. And my above comments about how the march organisers should be explicitly telling extremists that they aren’t welcome at the marches, which I have not seen them do (although please do correct me if you have seen examples where they have made this clear).

Oh that's fine then, I hope I don't see them posting how appalled they are when they see people waving placards or wearing tops that say 'Netanyahu is a wanted war criminal' in the colours of the Israeli flag.

Do you have any comments on the videos and photos they’ve shared of extremists from the march? Are you still going to accuse me of lying about these people being a part of the march?

You have no idea.

I'm Jewish, a British Jew. I accidently turned a corner near Westminster a few weeks ago and found myself in the middle of a protest. I was meeting a Canadian friend who had booked a tour of the Houses of Parliament. I was wearing a small Star of David, which I always wear.

Someone yelled out "look a Jew girl" an I was suddenly surrounded by people demanding to know if I was a zionist, which just means should the single Jewish country in the world exist. I was terrified and 'rescued' by two police officers who escorted me towards Whitehall and then told me off. Because apparently I shouldn't be wearing a Star of David as it's provocative.

Calling for the destruction of the state of Israel and murder of Jews is ok but me wearing a small pendant is provocative.

Certain Western governments are responsible for the current regime in Iran.

If the protesters were trying to burn people alive, burning bins, looting and throwing bricks at the police, I'm sure they'd be shut down.

Anyone who supports atrocities has something very wrong with them. If it was up to me we'd lock them up and throw away the key.

I didn't call you a liar and those placards are clearly unacceptable and should be banned. What I can't stand is bloody hypocrisy.

@IHateTheM25

That is unbelievable

Why shouldn't you wear a Star of David

It seems ok for the protesters to be anti semitic or in all honesty openly racist against Jews almost like a Nazi in Germany.

Why are the police so weak

Whilst I don’t support their choice of the colours of the flag , suggesting that this is in any way comparable to the open chants of supports for the Houthis, the Khaybar chants, the placards showing the Star of David being thrown into the bin and chants shouting support for a October 7th is a great misjustice.

like I said above, I am not calling for the marches to be banned. I am not calling for people to stop showing support for ordinary Palestinians caught up in the violence or demanding a ceasefire. I am calling into question why hundreds of thousands of people are happy to March alongside these extremists, why march organisers aren’t explicitly telling these extremists that they aren’t welcome, and why the police aren’t doing more to prosecute those who chant these awful things. Jews are once again, being failed.

We Jews know all to well that violent massacres against us always begin with words. With anti-Semitic slogans and images and chants against us. Violence is almost always the end stage. That is why we are so deeply deeply concerned and what we are seeing unfold in front of us.

and I’m referring only to large scale violence. Individual violent attacks against Jews have significantly increased since October 7th last year.

That's so bad. I really feel for people in this position. I don't think it should be happening to you and others but feel there's no process to change it.

Yes it's concerning that incidents against both communities have risen. Even though anti Muslim violence was so strongly exhibited during the riots, that doesn't mean that banners and slogans are acceptable.

I completely understand your concern, we've all witnessed a population dehumanised and brought to the brink of starvation while bombs reign down on them.

Words are very powerful and a strong part of indoctrination and propaganda. Calling people vermin and animals has an effect.

Even though the banners and slogans are not repeated by the vast majority and the protests have been largely peaceful, that doesn't mean that any form of extremism is acceptable.

Why are you trying to minimise the extremism shown at these marches? Why can’t you just come out and say ‘yes this extremism is wrong, and I agree that the march organisers should be making it clear that the extremists aren’t welcome?’

I've been very clear that people who support atrocities and any form of extremism are wrong. I've clearly said that people have a right to feel safe and the rise in incidents against both communities is wrong.

It's for the police to deal with anyone who has committed a crime.

Looks likely. Check out the bibliography https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yahwism#CITEREFSommer2009

If i went on a march and there was 1 person next to me holding a placard supporting a proscribed terrorist group, I would start to consider what kind of march I was partaking in.

Apparently that isn't a thing in the UK. I made exactly the same point during the Brexit referendum as people were queuing up behind fascists to cast their vote for Leave and was told that there is a magic sorting hat* that can tell "good" votes from "bad" votes.

However those shit for brains aside, I do agree than people should pay attention to who they stand with. But that returns us neatly to the main thrust of the OP about a wariness of what can hide inside a monolithic concept like "Islam".

*The actual concept was "but 'they' will know ...."

And yet here you are on a thread that contains bullshit tropes about Muslims. Can you not see the parallels?

If extremism is shown the police should deal with it, and wearing a swastika or attacking someone who is Jewish is completely unacceptable, although I would like to hear from Jewish people who also attend these protests about their experiences too.

What I can't stand is the exaggeration and hyperbole by people trying to shut the protests down because they don't like any focus on the horrors of what Israel is doing in the name of so called defence.

If extremism is shown the police should deal with it, and wearing a swastika or attacking someone who is Jewish is completely unacceptable,

The attacking bit should go without saying - criminal act go to jail.

I am less sure about banning symbols and their uses. Quite aside from the fact it plays directly into the "we are being persecuted" narrative that fuels a lot of extremism, it suggests a slight insecurity on the part of society that will be interpreted as a weakness by the very same people.

I don't believe in magic words. I don't believe in magic spells. I don't believe in magic books. And I don't believe in magic symbols of any stripe.

Yes, a swastika is offensive. But we return to the crux of a liberal democracy which is that peoples freedom of expression is equally opposed to their lack of right not to be offended. It's truly impossible to ban all offence. And rather that even trying (which some are) you have to remind people it's the tax on their freedom of speech.

This seems germane to this thread as creating a fear of offence in society is a really good way to allow sinister elements to act unchecked.

Offence is clearly a subjective state of being. And should be treated as such.

My view, (as ever subject to change), there is an ebb and flow around the boundaries of free speech dependent on the risk to societal stability that it represents at any given time.

jihadists/hate preachers are a risk to the stability of western society. They know it (it's their raisin d'etre), we know it, the security services know it. As @SerendipityJane says, they hide in the monolith of Islam.

I wonder where the people in Stacey Dooley's doc. are now. It would be interesting to revisit their views to see what's changed in the ensuing years.

I think there is nothing better than openly talk, extensively, about these issues. Yes, it offends some people. I do get offended by some of the things said here about christians, but please keep them coming. I do not want to shut debate or stop anyone from raising their concerns and analogies. Christianity has a long grim history, I know. I still love christians and many of the christian chore principles.

There is no point in denying that islamism exists, don't you think? The government in Afghanistan is an example. We need to separate the religion from the political movements and regimes. It sounds easy, indeed. But the islamists poise themselves as true pure muslims. They do muddy the waters on purpose. They are really good at this.
There has been (see the preacher in the video about Luton, who made it to jail) people within UK preaching islamism. Those are a minority. But I think just brushing it under the carpet does not help. We need to face it. Talk about it.
It is sad and unfair that perfectly law abiding muslims feel judged by this. That some has got attacked due to racism evolving from this. Unfortunatelly, there are extemists in all groups. It is up to those in the reasonable middle to fight them out of society.

Regarding the marches, I think that the identifiable presence of extremists is a good thing. Before you jump to it, hear me out: instead of spending millions finding them out, we only need some police officers with a notebook, camera and walk up to them and get their ID, possibly arrest them. Let them come out and show their faces. Some may be able of redemption. Others will end up in jail too.
I am sorry that any jew has been harrassed. That is wrong.
I must also say that we should be able to express our opinion on the political and war actions of Israel, as we do with any other country.

But what are the bullshit tropes?

It is a fact that Sharia Law in Afghanistan and Iran (and other places) are completely detrimental to women’s rights and existence as full, independent humans. This is within Islam.
Ditto strands of mosques in Europe where Sharia Law is practised and encouraged.
I don’t want that. Not anywhere ideally, but really not here in the midst of our free society.

So what are the bullshit tropes?
Has anyone labelled Muslims, or is it more a much needed criticism of parts of the Islamic religion?

We need to separate the religion from the political movements and regimes.

That is if you assume there is a difference. What if you take the view that religions are merely political organisations that have (literally) sprinkled the fear of god into their goals ? The antagonism we can see in history between these supposedly separate entities does look suspiciously like they are really both competing over the same thing.

They are different @SerendipityJane .
But those who do want to use religion as to push for political control will use religion, because it is a rather convenient way.
It took many centuries and the spilled blood and ashes (Christianity did burn people alive at some point in history!) of our ancestors in Europe, but we got there, amidst not perfect separation, but a doable one. Not perfect, but it allows us freedom. And I think it is a good base for mixed communities indeed. If you live in UK today, you do not need to ever hear a single word from a religious book if you are not inclined to do so.

If the rule of the land includes freedom of religious belief and practice, equality for women (including the right to work to support their families), an elected political representation, freedom of speech, rights to education, health care and so on, there is a political and law system separated from religion.
If the rules of the land start by impossing a single religion and worship practice (though they may tollerate a list of others), continue with listing what women ( or other individuals, but women seem to be the primary target) can wear, do and say, and they profess to follow a particular religion, then you have a political regime using the excuse of religion. They will kill people who do not comply (against chore principle of most religions), force people into practices (again, most religions are meant to take natural place in the heart of the believer, not forced)...
So, secular systems will mention freedom and religionS. Yes, they will be influenced by culture, which is influenced by religion and they will not be perfect, I know. But extremist regimes will proclaim a single religion, while violating its values, one after another. It is only the extreme ones who deny a difference between religion and policy/ politics.

They are different

Are they ? A bullet is very different to a spear to some people, but exactly the same thing to someone lying dead having been struck by either.