Of course, their loyalty should ideally lie with Britain, but anyone not just Muslims, can and have opposed the Iraq War. It needn't only be a religious thing.
Didn't loads of folk, irrespective of religion, oppose the Vietnam War?
You're confusing two different concepts there. Opposing the war does not mean cheering on the deaths of the soldiers sent out to fight it. An anti-war campaigner should have no problem condemning the deaths of soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan, unless he identifies with the group who did the killing.
It's surprising but so many people have been bought up to believe that whenever the West takes military action in a non Western country it is a racist, genocidal, greed driven, cowardly act of oppression. Killing poor brown people in the name of imperialism.
They see the world through the eyes of Noam Chomsky and Michael Moore.
For these rather unextreme middle class liberal minded people, British soldiers represent the evil neocon agenda, a revival of Western imperialism, brutal occupation, racism, power, greed and oil grabbing genocide.
This view of the West causes some very liberal minded people to at worst cheer the deaths of British soldiers and at best say that they don't cheer but that the soldier had it coming for being part of a military machine which is in the process of oppressing poor people and frying babies for oil.
When they hear of British soldiers being killed they don't react as if a professional soldier from a liberal democracy has been killed fighting a fascistic theocratic regime of the far right they react as if a racist boot boy and pawn of an evil empire has been mercifully wiped out by the courageous and humble resistance.
Many people have been bought up to oppose the British Army in everything it does, they have been taught all their lives that imperialism was the biggest crime in history and when the see British or American soldiers they immediately think of slaves being dragged from Africa, children being shot at Amritsar, the massacre at Mai Lai or Hitlers SS.
Good liberal people look on any Western military action and oppose it.
The lesson liberals took from WW2 was not that we did the right thing by standing up to tyranny and introducing liberal democracy to Germany and Japan but that "war is never the answer" and that ultimately Western military might ends up being like the Nazi War machine instead of the Marshal Plan.
They identify the modern Liberal democracies of today more with that those regimes of Hitler and Mussolini than Roosevelt and Churchill. Who were incidentally wicked imperialists of the worst kind anyway.
They see white men in uniforms with guns and don't see the (liberal democratic human right supporting) Allies fighting the far right they immediately associate those soldiers with the darkest moments in our history.
That is why so many normally sensible people cheer the deaths of our soldiers or fail to oppose those who our troops are fighting.
So cheering the deaths of our troops and supporting Iraqi insurgents doesn't necessarily make one an extremist. It's only extreme if you view the world as it is but many people see the world differently.
For them the bad things that are written about Iraqi insurgents and the Taliban are just lies written by the Zionist controlled Western media to smear resistance to brutal illegal occupation.
If that's how you see the world then it's not extreme to support the far right and cheers the deaths of British soldiers.
So I'm starting to see problems with this list.
As Hass says many liberal Muslims might support Sharia law.
In my humble opinion it's not because they want to see women demoted to second place and stonings and beheadings but because by default they have been bought up to not question the perfection of Islam.
If you blindly accept that Islam is perfect it is quite easy not to care about the details of Sharia and just support it because it comes from the one true perfect religion and ultimately the creator of the universe.
So condemning homosexuality, supporting Sharia, supporting the Taliban and opposing our troops doesn't necessarily make one an extremist. Deluded, confused and labouring under some pretty foolish beliefs but not necessarily extreme.
I think Rashna is spot on if they use the word Jihad and talk about the Caliphate that is when the alarm bells should start ringing.
Although if you tick all of the boxes on the list and not only one or two you are without a doubt an extreme fuck pig it is easy to see how this list could alienate potentially moderate people.
Trust the government to get it wrong.
They got it seriously wrong in the 90's when under the banner of human rights they welcomed, protected and supported Jihadis in their you leave us alone and we'll leave you alone Covenant Of Security.
They get it wrong when they invade Iraq and assume they have got Afghanistan sorted.
They get it wrong when they appease Muslim anger by trying to pass "Incitement to religious hatred/blasphemy laws"
They get it doubly wrong when they try to oppose Al Quieda by promoting The Muslim Brotherhood.
Now when they finally seem to be drawing the line in the sand and saying enough is enough and they fuck that up....Sheesh
And these pricks went to university and get paid top dollar. Give us a job, I could do that.
Topic: Who Is An Extremist?