Twat. You said:

"Islamist is a term that criticises all Muslims." No it isn't. It criticises the extremists because that is the only true catchment of the term.

You said: -

"As a word it most certainly does.

The relationship is what it is and how it is perceived, but the term makes quite clear that people wish to disassociate crimes in the name of religion with ones in the name of this particular religion.". You might have expressed that better. In fact your words are close to gibberish. But "Islamist" and "Islam" are not the same, except to the same mentality that confuses paediatrician with paedophile.

You said: -

"Where you made a general link and I pointed out (as I reckon I may have done on the thread you have linked to) that Islamist is an affront to Islam as it makes a connection that is never made when Christians say Jesus told me to polish my guns.

I, like most decent people, am uncomfortable with the term Islamist as describing radicalisation of a superstition when it is, as all religious affairs, using gullible people to fight your battles for you. Only Muslims get to have terrorists named in their image.

Islamism has nothing to apologise for. It isn't in the business of apologising. Put back into the context you just brought your own quote out of, you were inferring that Islam has much to apologise for, and that is your true character boy..."

That is gibberish too. "Islamist" distinguishes the extremists from other Muslims. It is the precise opposite of conflating the two. What KtheA and other critics of all things brown do is FAIL to make the distinction. As in the thread title.

I also must express incredulity at your assertion about "most decent people". The converse is the case. Decent people distinguish the extremist.

Then you say "Islamism has nothing to apologise for. Rubbish. There is much it MUST apoligose for – whether or not it is prepared so to do.

Your assertion about naming in image must also be challenged. I assume you have heard of the Lord's day remembrance Army. Other religions have their terrorists – and if you bother to look you will see that they are referred to as Xtian militias.


Keith implies that Islam must apologise for Islamists – that is his conflation. It is not a general conflation.

Methinks less port with the cheese next time.