Josie Long - we are more at risk from right wing extremists than Islamic extremists

[Goodluckjonathan76]

A friend just posted a link to Josie's rant on her Facebook page. I honestly felt sick watching it. For a start, in terms of numbers of deaths, we are looking at 2 deaths (Jo Cox and man at Finsbury Park mosque) (please correct me if I am wrong) compared to multiple deaths in Manchester and London Bridge, not to mention the attacks in Paris, Nice and Brussels. Firstly, how is this the time to be comparing which is worse, and secondly, if we must compare then Islamic extremists pose a far greater risk in terms of loss of life. Am I missing something? Or has the world gone mad.

Actually I could understand which point./side this comment was making
"Talk some sense about the people who want us dead from Islamists and, poof! Silence. "
People who want us dead from Islamists - who are those people - the few far right EDL type people or ISIS supporters?

Imam arrested in Birmingham. So much in this article is deeply disturbing. He is only now being arrested as Spain have requested extradition, but he has links with all sorts, including with a Bataclan terrorist and has been posting recruitment material for ISIS on YouTube and possibly running an ISIS cell from Sparkhill. Yet only now is he being arrested at the instigation of the Spanish authorities. It's almost unbelievable.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4646058/amp/Police-arrest-ISIS-supporter-Birmingham.html

For those who don't do the Mail

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jun/28/man-wanted-spanish-anti-terror-police-arrested-birmingham

Not had time to read all of this but heartened by sensible comments from Wisedad and becausebecausebecause. In my view, it's completley ridiculous to say the real threat to life is from right extremism, hence why I was so offended by Josie's rant. The real threat not just to life but to western values is from Islamic extremists.

Agree CrossWord. This guy has clearly been left there to do whatever he wants then when he does do something, there'll be some handwringing and talk about it being an unavoidable risk of living in a big city. Utterly disgraceful.

BetrandRussell, there is nothing more patronizing than the fascist left, trying to tell us black is white and night is day.

Note that the suspect also has 8 kids, no doubt all supported by the taxpayer whilst this man pursues his religious aims. Really sickening.

Love the way that "white privilege" is now used as an excuse for everything.

I don't get what "white privilege" has to do with any of this. As far as I can tell, it's a good way to muddy the waters in any discussion.

I qualify is BME. It's a strange term though. why single out the "b"? In any case, as a member of the BME group, I don't fear right wing extremists. I wouldn't say I fear islamic extremists either (that's also rare), but they are more on my mind than the other.

" In my view, it's completley ridiculous to say the real threat to life is from right extremism, hence why I was so offended by Josie's rant" Bur she didn't say that!

BetrandRussell "WiseDad was being so incredibly patronising"
I am sorry you feel belittled and less worthy because of how I wrote things. I do however note that at no point have you actually engaged with any point that I made in any substantive way other than to ask for my qualifications and to say I was being patronising.

I agree Because etc was unforgivably rude. Rudeness doesn't win arguments or win people over to a viewpoint. Neither does ignoring any points made.

To quote Pigeonsujour from the first page of this thread "You're free to post on the topic but don't expect not to be challenged if your points are weak." It transpires that the challenge wasn't taken up. Instead after I have been open in my argument, and lengthy main correspondent merely says "But that's not what [she] said". Err. Actually that is exactly what she said.

And the other earlier attempts at defence of JL's remarks amounted to name calling "white privilege" and "mansplaining" amongst other less charitable remarks.

We have had false equivalence "driving over people is bad therefore Islamic extremism and right wing extremism are as bad as each other" with the implied "therefore the threat level is the same.

It takes me a 5-15 minutes to post to this thread. At least some said they found it interesting. Those that disagreed couldn't engage at all.

And yes, that last was to be provocative. And why not? Two seconds to be rude or 15 minutes to think and consider and the choice was made to be rude by most.

Maybe we should discuss recipes for quiche instead?

WiseDad, I did not engage with you because you were not stating opinions, you were stating facts. That is why I asked what your qualifications were, and why, when you refused to say, I stopped engaging. It is no point debating someone who sets himself up as an expert unless you know where the expertise comes from.

I am puzzled. Does BertrandRussell agree with my fact base therefore agree with my opinion on the conclusions to be drawn or not? If not then why not?

For the third and hopefully last time my expertise or lack thereof in anything at all is actually irrelevant to a fact based argument. The argument stands or falls based on its own merits not the person proposing it. Would it make BR feel better if I said I was an ex-Muslim with years of prostelying behind me? Would it ruin my argument if I said I was Tommy Robinson? How can this simple point be talked past on such a regular basis unless BertrandRussell can see the truth behind my statements and accepts the argument but emotionally can't deal with the consequences. Either that or they are just thick. I don't believe the later so will think the former which is probably true of many now.

It takes me a 5-15 minutes to post to this thread. At least some said they found it interesting

All very well, but I'm sorry, you talk about things you only know about from having browsed through anti-Islamic sites, I prefer to take my knowledge from people who can read the Qur'an in its original language and know how to weigh up different parts of the Qur'an, after a lifetime of study.

Just flagging up this guest post from a former EDL member

Atenco said "prefer to take my knowledge from people who can read the Qur'an in its original language and know how to weigh up different parts of the Qur'an, after a lifetime of study.". This is all diversion away from my points and is essentially another argument from authority, and yet again, completely missing the point. It is irrelevant who you listen to and how long they have studied when discussing verifiable fact

Are you denying the translations are correct?
Are you stating that any of the facts that I have posted are not true?
Are you denying that the Quran says to follow Mohammed's example?
Are you denying that he was, clearly, a bad man by any reasonable enlightened moral standard?

The language used to express the facts in is irrelevant unless the translation was incorrect and there has been no debate on the translation.

In addition I must assume that Atenco is a fluent Arabic speaker and can engage with their tutor who has studied for years in that language. If not then they are using a translation as well in which case tell us what the correctly translated version says for the references I posted. If you do this please reference the translation used..

To those reading the thread but not posting I repeat my earlier advice to live by the golden rule and question what you are told. But I add, be aware in a debate when others are using diversions to avoid talking about the core issue. It happened a lot here.

*@poster OlennasWimple. Good spot. I wonder what my eldest does online. Requiring access to his phone at any time is all well and good but when it is all Snapchat based communication you can't check a thing. Disliking people because of some physical characteristic is unpleasant and unwarranted. Dislike for other reasons is not unreasonable otherwise Jon Snow's "F** the Tories" chant would be extremist. Being a Tory is a belief system. Imagine chanting "Fuck the [insert religion of your choice here]". Impossible as it is classed as hate speech. Which is a massive problem for society in my view. Free speech is essential and protecting people makes EDL et al hide from view. Debate and discussion are the powerful tools in the war of ideas and beliefs and society has hampered that debate by proscribing certain ideas. Those ideas need combatting in speech, just as much the idea that Islam is a religion of peace the idea that all Muslims are bad people needs debating.

School run time.

Interesting article about tackling "non-violent" Islamist extremism

In Plain Sight: MEND, CAGE, and So-Called “Non-Violent Extremism”

conatusnews.com/plain-sight-mend-cage-non-violent-extremism/

I found this video of Douglas Murray speaking interesting. It's called "Douglas Murray on Tommy Robinson (and the Establishment)" but it's not about TR, it's about how the Establishment are failing to deal with Islamist extremism and are instead focusing on the secondary problem of reactions to it.