From “Lady Warsi and the concept of extremism,” by Andrew Brown in The Guardian, January 20 (thanks to James):
The problem here is that the division of Muslims into “extreme” and “moderate” strengthens the underlying pattern that to be extremely Muslim is to be an extremist Muslim. This is an equivalence that the preachers of hate on both sides, from Robert Spencer to Anwar al-Awlaki, would happily agree. Indeed it is the starting point of their analysis of the world. But the rest of us, and the government, have to prove it is an entirely false equivalence.
Let’s go to the videotape: Al-Awlaki has used the laws of jihad to justify theft by Muslims against non-Muslim Westerners. He has called for the murder of cartoonist Molly Norris, who lost her identity and her job as a result. He has inspired countless jihad plots, and in many cases had direct contact with the would-be jihadists; these include the recent London Christmas plot; the Fort Hood jihad massacre; the Detroit Christmas underwear jihad plot; and 9/11 itself.
How does my record stack up? Well, let’s see: I have never justified theft by anyone; never called for anyone’s murder; and never justified, inspired, incited, encouraged, participated in, or exhorted anyone to commit any terrorist attacks. I’ve had no involvement in any terror plotting or contact with any terrorist.
On what grounds, then, does Andrew Brown equate me with al-Awlaki? Because, he says, we are both “preachers of hate.” So apparently in Andrew Brown’s world, working through violent means to impose an authoritarian political system denying the freedom of speech, the freedom of conscience, and equality of rights of women and non-Muslims is essentially the same thing as working to resist the imposition of that system and defend freedom and human rights.
Clearly, Andrew Brown is an intellectual and moral imbecile, or something worse.