‘Not Islam’. It is just not going to stand up to any reasonable evaluation as increasingly the broken bodies and lives keep rolling in.
In not revealing this 'blank' class this so called 'distinct ideology' and explaining how it generates such extremists views, all the while the exact same individuals can be shown to exist in a claimed liberal moderate context does not enable these claims to be able to be rationally accepted. For three reasons, one life experience, two the claims are not coming from a credible source, and three no evidence it is in fact true.
Simple life experience would determine such a claim as illogical. These Islamic/Muslim fundamentalist, extremists and terrorists are being sourced from these very same families, institutions, communities and cultures claiming they are the 'real' Islam, they are the liberal moderates. How many times have we heard the parents of terrorists, institutions and communities they come from proclaiming loudly they are liberal moderates “We cannot understand how this has happened?”. One or two outliers statistically this may be taken as approaching truth but thousands? To claim Islamic/Muslim culture is pristine and at the same time they produce thousands of extremists, fundamentalists and terrorists directly from their cultures simply makes no sense. It would be the same as throwing yeast into dough, being seen to do so and then claiming you have no idea why the dough expands.
The British Task Force is simply not a credible source for such statements regards a purely psychological /social psychology field of study based upon a cultural critique of the inputs from the cultural foundation codex textual and non-textual. No one has presented any credible research to support the notion the Islamic cultural codex constructs of Other which enable such Islamic extremism cannot be enabled in anyway within what is defined as a liberal moderate Islamic Muslim context, is in no way sourced from the exact same codex, if this cannot be proved in a scientific manner the political spin is seen for what it is, spin. The British Task Force as with David Cameron are purely political creatures of the moment telling the ‘truth’ is clearly seen as going too far.
Just saying there is 'a distinct ideology' cultural foundation codex is not proof there is, where is the evidence this is the case from a credible source that can be seen as much as possible to be removed from bias in either direction? There is none and there is a very good reason why, the notion of 'a distinct ideology' is a lie.
An Australian ‘liberal moderate’ Muslim bemoaning and being fearful of the rise of these so called Islamic/Muslim extremists and fundamentalists in Australia, at a Muslim conference, referred to these extremists and fundamentalists as the ‘True Believers’. In the Muslim community itself therefore extremists and fundamentalists are clearly seen as integrally linked to Muslim community and interpreting Islam in its 'True' form. It is therefore fallacious to promote the notion of extremists, fundamentalists and even terrorists themselves as 'distinct', separate, not connected at all to the 'real' Islamic/Muslim culture.
It is a very dangerous lie because it prevents the Islamic/Muslim cultures from being held to account that they do indeed have a cultural foundation codex which although it informs a supposedly 'good' construct via selectivity of Islamic/Muslim codex leaving out the 'evil' bits regards Other, at the same time the Islamic/Muslim cultural foundation codex informs an 'evil' construct via selectivity of Islamic/Muslim codex leaving out the 'good' bits regards Other. Islamic/Muslim culture informs 'good' and 'evil' at the same time. It is not one or the other.
It clearly indicates there must be extensive qualification of these so called 'good' bits of the Islamic/Muslim codex for Islamic/Muslims extremist fundamentalists adherents to exist statistically in such numbers. And if one simply reads the core Islamic cultural foundation textual codex the Quran such qualification are overwhelming and makes statements of any support for Other logically inconsistent and determines even what appears to be a categorical statement in support of Other i.e. Other cannot be coerced to change religion for instance, when taken in context of the construct of Other already detailed it is simply a restatement of the fact it is impossible to so.
The Islamic God is the only one who can enable a human to believe according to the Quran, human intervention is wasted effort and forcing one to believe is in reality not possible anyway. This has been utilized to prove Islam has respect for Others religion, it does not mean this at all, and clear diabolical descriptions of Other from the very first pages of the Quran make this very clear, it is just a restatement of the conclusion already arrived at in the Quran it is impossible to force change of belief that is Gods job.
It does not mean at all the construct applied to Other in not ‘voluntarily’ believing, rejecting the word, simply goes away, that Other does not suffer the full consequences as detailed in the Quran of justified ‘grievous harm’ and ‘severest penalty’ – we see the outcome of this construct every day. Also the Quran assigns each Muslim with the power to identify ‘non-true-believers’ those only mouthing adherence, and if it is at all possible these Other are in for an even worse time.
How this is possible to determine without any doubt another’s non-belief in reality beggars belief but I am sure such a construct has determined the elimination of many ‘innocents’ in fact we have all seen them passing in the images and words of horror each day. Though a neat psychological trick to create fear you may be seen to be not measuring up to the desired cultural mean - because what is authorized to happen to you is not very pleasant.
"Mr Cameron said that the task force had also looked at Islamophobic extremism, such as the murder of 82-year-old Mohammed Saleem, who was stabbed to death by a Ukrainian student as he walked home from a mosque earlier this year."
If one accepts the existence of a British Task Force 'distinct ideology' one therefore must accept the existence of 'Islamophobic extremism', because 'Islam's peaceful principles' are manifest, Islam and according to the British Task Force should not be confused with 'Not Islam' which is informing 'Not Islam' 'grievous harm' and 'severest penalty' against Other.
Therefore one can be justifiably fearful of 'Not Islam', this is a rational fear and not a mental illness a phobia, whereas fear of peaceful 'Islam' is a mental illness and a phobia.
Given the reasoning above that Islam informs from opposite ends of the spectrum both peace and terror and varying degrees of both along the Islamic/Muslim cultural behavioral spectrum the argument Islamophobia exists is based on a false premise Islam does not inform terror where clearly even today we see that it does.
How much do you think is expended simply to protect humanity from our Islam/Muslims neighbors’ worldwide better spent elsewhere on education, health, infrastructure, …..? This David Cameron would have us believe is not rational fear of what Islam can and does do?
Murdering anyone is wrong, but this does not translate into justifying the fear of what Islam/Muslims can and does do being determined as a phobia. It is the same as determining as not all members of the Nazi party are violent or advocate violence (As Norman above did) even though their textual codex certainly does and therefore determining the Nazi as a threat despite attempted and successful terror against Other the fear of them in the streets or elsewhere is a phobia. I have to start to observe maybe such rational is a mental illness – pathological altruism for instance.
Look you can fool most people most of the time but there comes a time when the hypocrisy and contradictions simply are unsustainable no matter how much we suffer from wishful thinking - for our own survival as individuals and a culture it will become obvious what the British Task Force and David Cameron are putting forward as reality is a blatant lie. Just that one child too many and it all falls apart. Will it be your child, it could very well be, we all think we are immune it happens to someone else, I am here to tell you sadly it is not the case.
To ascertain if 'a distinct ideology' is a valid conclusion one simply has to ask the question - "Have any Islamic/Muslim extremists, fundamentalists and terrorists come from so called liberal moderate families, have any Islamic/Muslim extremists, fundamentalists and terrorists come from local religious institutions which claim to be liberal moderate, have any Islamic/Muslim extremists, fundamentalists and terrorists come from any Islamic/Muslim culture insitu in Society which proclaims itself liberal moderate?"
And if these are the same families, religious institutions, cultures the British Task Force and David Cameron are defining as the 'real' Islam then if the answer is yes then it is not possible for "a distinct ideology" being the determinate of the nature of the Islamic/Muslim extremists, fundamentalists and terrorists for an individual’s ethics and informed actions are shaped by the culture within which they exist as the "Non-Islam" as an ethical construct is determined as 'a distinct ideology' and therefore separate from the 'real' Islam cultural context these Islamic/Muslim extremists, fundamentalists and terrorists simply cannot possibly exists in the so called 'real' liberal moderate Islamic context, yet they do - therefore these Islamic/Muslim extremists, fundamentalists and terrorists are being matured in the liberal moderate Islamic/Muslim context and they along with their joint cultural foundation codex are all responsible for the appearance of the Islamic/Muslim extremists, fundamentalists and terrorists.