Have We Just As Much To Fear From The Far-Right As We Have From Islamic Terrorism?

[anotheoldgit]

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/jo-cox-trial-thomas-mair-terrorist-nazi-isis-jihadis-far-right-police-only-focus-a7436426.html

Yes it is a sad fact that Jo Cox was brutally murdered by a lone Far-Right fanatic, but is there really a rise in Far-Right terrorism in this country to cause concern?

[jno]

hate crimes have been more frequent since the Brexit vote, which concerns me; perhaps others are more forgiving.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/brexit-hate-crime-racism-eu-referendum-poland-islam-more-in-common-a7231836.html

[dannyk13]

Interesting article here:-
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/nick-lowles/far-right-politics_b_9188114.html

[jim360]

Since one of the worst terrorist incidents in Europe in recent years was indeed due to a far-right terrorist, in Anders Breivik, I would say that at the very least we should take the threat as seriously. Not sure that's the same as having "just as much to fear" [my italics], though.

[Lunol]

"Have We Just As Much To Fear From The Far-Right As We Have From Islamic Terrorism?"

" but is there really a rise in Far-Right terrorism in this country to cause concern? "

Yes, had those who smash windows of Mosques, throw bacon, pigs heads , target muslims for abuse and attacks had more than 2 braincells to rub together then there is no doubt you could replace the abuse and attacks with murder, bacon and pigs heads with explosives and grenades.

A war between evil and evil ie. Isis and similar fanatics vs the far reich is definitely on the books and this appears to be getting worse.

Let us take a moment to praise Bliar and Bush for this now snowballing war.

[naomi24]

This is an unintentionally misleading question. People fear what they call 'the Right', but they consistently fail to recognise that there are none further 'Right' than Islamic extremists.

[Lunol]

"This is an unintentionally misleading question. People fear what they call 'the Right', but they consistently fail to recognise that there are none further 'Right' than Islamic extremists."

Hence my post above and below.

"A war between evil and evil ie. Isis and similar fanatics vs the far reich.

[andy-hughes]

Naomi - // This is an unintentionally misleading question. People fear what they call 'the Right', but they consistently fail to recognise that there are none further 'Right' than Islamic extremists. //

Since the term 'Far Right' is usually attached to political extremists, I am not sure it is a good fit for religious extremists.

In terms of methods, terrorism, and indoctrination, I am sure they have much to share, but in terms of motivation - political reform and religious reform, I am not sure they make good bedfellows.

[bednobs]

i think they do andy - isis could not be further right

[andy-hughes]

bednobs - in terms of intolerance, I entirely agree, but their motivation is religious, whereas the usual 'Far Right' are political - that is what I see as a difference in them,

[Zeuhl]

But Islam isn't just a religion is it?

It requires its followers to support and enact a particular world view that requires domination of territory and other populations.

Therefore it has always had a political and territorial dimension.

[vetuste_ennemi]

Indeed, Islam has a religiously mandated political objective: to subject the whole world to God's Law (whether by persuasion or force - but typically the latter). That is what Mohammed strived for in his lifetime and why his successors engaged in perpetual war against first the Romano-Christian world, then the Persian world, the Hindu world and so on.

The arguments by other Muslims against ISIS is not that the concept of the Caliphate and its extension by jihad is , but that al-Baghdadi is not a legitimate caliph.


Well, well, both the winner and the runner-up of my "Dedicated Follower of Fashion Award" on the same thread, cheek to jowl.

Welcome back, Zeuhl.

[vetuste_ennemi]

its extension by jihad is UNISLAMIC...

[jno]

hello, Zeuhl. I think Isis has a definite territorial dimension: a caliphate can only exist if it has land. Remove them from it and they're nothing. In that respect they're unlike al-Qaeda.

[Zacs-Master]

Maybe AOG's question should have read Have We Just As Much To Fear From The 'European' Far-Right As We Have From Islamic Terrorism?

A simple definition which was actually pretty clear but which has, as usual, been misinterpreted by some, leading to off-piste answers.

[Muntin]

Militant Islam seeks to establish and extend the 'Caliphate' by 'Jihad' or 'struggle'. Peaceful means or otherwise. Is this un-Islamic? Depends which part of the Koran you read, I gather. It is far right and it certainly causes me concern.
We must hope that the security services are being vigilant.

[Zeuhl]

Hi jno

Agree with you, but the concern is the fundamental concepts enshrined in the Quran which ALL muslims are required to live by:

(these are the Saudi approved translations)

61:9 He it is Who has sent His Messenger (Muhammad) with guidance and the religion of truth (Islamic monotheism) to make it victorious over all (other) religions even though the Mushrikûn (polytheists, pagans, idolaters, and disbelievers in the Oneness of Allah and His Messenger Muhammad) hate (it)

48:28 He it is Who has sent His Messenger (Muhammad) with guidance and the religion of truth (Islam), that He may make it (Islam) superior to all religions. And All-Sufficient is Allah as a Witness.

I'm not a Christian and have little time for any of it, but in truth, although in the distant past some christians have exploited religion in order to subjugate or destroy others, nowhere in the christian tracts (The New Testament) are there demands and expectations of for such subjugation as found in the Quran.

And let's bear in mind the foundation of 'islam'

[Zeuhl]

... the foundation of 'islam'

The word Islam comes from the term "al-silm" which means peace, and the word "istaslama" (استسلاما) means to "surrender" or "submission

[vetuste_ennemi]

I understood (from what I've read - and rightly or wrongly) that the words for peace and submission are cognates, but that the primary meaning is submission.

One of my sources from Dr. Mark Durie's web-site:

"Words for ‘peace’ in European languages imply the absence of war, and freedom from disturbance. It is no coincidence that the German words Friede ‘peace’ and frei ‘free’ sound similar, because they come from the same root.
While there is a link in Arabic between salam, a word often translated ‘peace’, and Islam, the real connection is found in the idea of safety.
The word Islam is based upon a military metaphor. Derived from aslama ‘surrender’ its primary meaning is to make oneself safe (salama) through surrender. In its original meaning, a muslim was someone who surrendered in warfare.
Thus Islam did not stand for the absence of war, but for one of its intended outcomes: surrender leading to the ‘safety’ of captivity. It was Muhammad himself who said to his non-Muslim neighbors aslim taslam ‘surrender (i.e. convert to Islam) and you will be safe’."

He cites Lane's Arabic-English Lexicon on the root s-l-m. The full link is here:

http://blog.markdurie.com/2015/12/anyone-using-phrase-islam-is-religion.html

[naomi24]

Since the term ‘Islamic extremists’ seems to have created some confusion, let’s say Islamic fundamentalism. The ‘far right’ are patriots, but Islam for Islamists is considered paramount, transcending all, including patriotism; its ultimate ambition, by whatever means necessary, world subjugation and domination. Therefore Islamic fundamentalism is by far the more dangerous of the two and the one from which we have most to fear. Good posts from v_e and Zeuhl.

[fiction-factory]

It's not often i agree with naomi but I do here- I have said before that many of the things Islamists believe in with regard to Jews, women, homosexuality etc are far more aligned to the far right than the left- and I am not sure why the Labour Party is not more vocal on some of these issues