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.

If you read what I said I did not say they are not Muslims, I said "they are not interested in Islam" and that people shouldn't insist that they are "acting on behalf of Muslims"

A fine but important distinction.

"WiseDad" if you want answers to your question go to an iman, they are not really germane to the discussion

they are not interested in Islam - what are they interested in then? Considering they believe they've pledged their lives to Allah and are working towards creating a Caliphate or Islamic State.

Atenco - ah but they are very interested in Islam. Otherwise they wouldn't be using it to justify actions, they wouldn't be quoting from Hadith and Quran to justify actions and they wouldn't be incited by speakers at mosques and online to "defend Muslims". The evidence of islam's involvement is overhelming and after the last attacks it was clear from the language the politicians used, at long last, that there was an issue with Islamic terror.

You may think they are Poor (they are not), uneducated (including the graduates and doctors?), loners (funny loner who takes two other people with him to a terro attack and leaves a wife and two small children behind!) but alas the evidence is strong that they are part of a wider community which wishes destruction upon the Western lifestyle. Alas that community sits within a still wide community of law abiding peaceful people who shares cultural and religous ideas and behaviours.

Finally, and I won't be back on this thread, consider the recent attacks in Paris, Brussels and Brussels again. Just consider them more evidence there is a real and terrible issue here.

All the Muslims I know professionally or as friends are smart capable well-educated and rationale and it is unimaginable they would wish harm on anyone. But they are not the ones we have an issue with, and it is hard to spot the bad ones. Mind you the securit services seem to have known about the recent attackers for while but they didn't do something bad e ought to merit charges. And now lots of people are dead or maimed.

I agree that the likes of ISIS are not 'acting on behalf of muslims' but it concerns me greatly that no one (including Muslims themselves) seems to be able to question, criticise or push forward any kind of debate, much less reform, of Islam. There is clearly massive scope for misinterpretation and corruption of Islam as a faith if it can be used to 'justify' the thinking of extremists and I don't understand why no one seems to be allowed to challenge that without being labelled a racist bigot

I don't understand Atenco why you list various actions which you claim are un-Islamic as evidence that ISIS aren't Muslims but you think Dad's points about what is and isn't Islamic teaching is "not germane to the discussion".

Maajid Nawaz talking about the links between Abedi and the Didsbury Mosque, and some of the people who spoke there.

www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/maajid-nawaz/maajid-nawaz-refuses-to-praise-didsbury-mosque/

If you read what I said I did not say they are not Muslims, I said "they are not interested in Islam" and that people shouldn't insist that they are "acting on behalf of Muslims"

No-one is claiming ISIS are acting on behalf of Muslims.

But I don't understand what you mean to say they are not interested in Islam. Their actions are based on their interpretation of Islam. They are doing what they do because of their beliefs. They declare that their reasons for attacks are their Islamic beliefs when they claim responsibility.

So what does it mean to say "they are not interested in Islam"? It just seems like denial of a basic truth to me.

I don't understand why no one seems to be allowed to challenge that without being labelled a racist bigot - exactly this!

We are now living in a society, whereby noone can express views against extreme Islamic traditions without being labelled an islamophobe, but in my opinion EVERYONE should be anti these things. Those that aren't and promote or incite them need to be criminalised.

The Archbishop of Canterbury's view

Faith leaders must take responsibility for countering the religious justification for atrocities committed in their name, the Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, has said.

The Most Reverend Welby said throughout history religious scriptures have "been twisted and misused" by people to justify hates of violence and "We have got to say that if something happens within our own faith tradition we need to take responsibility for countering that".

He said politicians should not just say "this is nothing to do with Islam" and focus on the security of political aspects of it as it is also an ideological problem.

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/archbishop-canterbury-justin-welby-london-attack-islam-twisted-misused-muslim-faith-a7772916.html

"We are now living in a society, whereby noone can express views against extreme Islamic traditions without being labelled an islamophobe"

Are we? Are you sure you're not confusing "criticizing extreme Islamic traditions" which is, as far as I am aware, fine and being Islamophobic which isn't ........

Bert obviously not.

Then tell me who's stopping you criticizing extreme Islamic traditions, then. Which ones would you like to criticize?

The ones that people claim "don't represent Islam" - forced marriage, honour killings, the burqa, the general suppression of women, etc

You've been called islamophobic for criticizing honour killings??????

No, not honour killings, although when expressed my thoughts on the burqa and general suppression of many Muslim women I've had jokey "oh someone's getting a bit racist" comments from my oh so middle class liberal friends. I was exactly the same a few years ago when we all grew up in a very affluent, middle class, diverse area where we didn't REALLY encounter those things day to day.
Now I live in a different area where I'm around that alot more and see the direct effects on society and the individuals, and have developed a very different view on it.
The honour killings point was what I meant people saying "isn't Islam"

Oh right.

So you are "allowed" to criticize extreme Islamic traditions.

The problem is that there are a lot of things that people associate with Muslims, or Christians or any other religion that actually ^aren't" part of the faith but people still do them "in the name of the faith". It would be wholly unfair to hold Christianity responsible for the nutcases in America who murder doctors who perform abortions, even though they say they are doing it in the name of Christianity.

So you are "allowed" to criticize extreme Islamic traditions. - I don't know what you mean by this? I see dressing women head to toe in robes as extreme and not allowing them to learn the local language, make eye contact with males or be in the lift with a male neighbour as extreme and as I said I get called racist for expressing that. So what do you mean by "allowed"?

It feels as though we've been conditioned not to criticise anything about Islam tbh, the 'it's nothing to do with Islam (complete with 'and if you say it is you're a racist' subtext)' line is trotted out so often that people have become too afraid to disagree with even the most obviously barbaric elements like honour killing and fgm. I believe in everyone's right to practise their chosen religion but I also believe that no religion should supercede the law, morality or general social mores of the modern world and it does sometimes appear that Islam is allowed to do just that in this country (and others).

Closing down that kind of debate and ability to question things goes against every advance we've made, particularly in terms of women's and LGBT rights and it does only seem to happen where Islam is concerned, which is why the word Islamaphobia exists where aphobia does not.

I agree Hiding

I agree Hidingtonothing - it's such a mystery.

So what would you like Muslims to stop doing?

Just seen the JL video. Nothing there I'd disagree with.

There is also a load of cock and bull being posted about what is actually written in the Quran and the hadiths. It's almost as if posters haven't actually read the items themselves and have relied on scaremongering and assumptions being made. "MN posters in discussing detail they know nothing of Shock!"

Pann - I don't think anyone on this thread has commented on what the qu'ran says? I could be wrong, and correct me if I am?

I recall Dad sharing his knowledge of it?

We have Bible Study and classes as the original material is very wide ranging and complex and MASSIVELY open to interpretation esp given that these books were not written in English and so needs v careful interpretation.