Welcome to this week’s caption competition folks. This week we feature Farah Ahmed, headmistress of the Slough branch of the Islamic Shakhsiyah Foundation which has been at the centre of a political storm this week.
Poor girl, it can’t be much fun being exposed for having links to a genocidal and racist organisation. I hope our competition cheers her up. As ever, captions in the comments box below.
55 Comments
“Who? Never heard of ‘em. No idea what you’re talking about.”
“Qualified Teacher Status? What’s that?”
No I am not a member of Hizb ut Tahrir. I only teach the nursery and primary children in our schools about the importance of Khilafah, the importance of hating Jews, the value of terrorism, the value of the “Muslim Personality”, the importance of Khilafah, how to wear a headscarf, the evils of music, the importance of Quranic Arabic as a modern language, the importance of Khilafah, the importance of hating Jews, the importance of hating whitey, the importance of Khilafah, the value of hating non Hizb Muslims, the importance of Khilafah, and, oh the importance of Khilafah.
No I am not a member of Hizb ut Tahrir and this is not a Hizb school. Did I mention the importance of Khilafah?
My favourite children’s television programme? Jackanory – Tell a Hizbi Story.
My favourite white person? Ed Balls, of course! Ma’ashallah what a man. He really knows the importance of Khilafah.
lol@dawood’s first post.
b’shalom
bananabrain
“HIzb ut-Tahrir, you say? Nah, never heard of them. Actually, I’m an Anglican.”
What is more important than children’s education? Oh come on, perleeeeze! The importance of the Khilafah, of course. And, as Ed Balls says, this is not a Hizb school and I am not a member of Hizb ut Tahrir.
“Poor girl? At least the people I met in HT were not a bunch of condescending sexist pillocks like the people who post at the Spittoon.”
No of course they weren’t. Hizbies only made her cover up, sit in gender segregated rooms and forced her to receive half the inheritance they would receive by family law and grant her half the legal rights of a man. Being a second class citizen of the Khilafah because of her gender is not sexist at all.
yea but no but yea but no but…… Eeeerrrrmmmmmm damn these dirty kuffar are getting smarter. Can’t wait to live an oppressed life in the Khilafah.
Our curriculum is to teach Asian pupils to dress like Arabs, talk like Arabs and walk like Arabs.
Most Arabs are already Asians, Gerrit. Arabia being in Western Asia.
I’m not a member of HT right now. Abdul Waheed thought it would be a good idea if I wasn’t offically a member anymore. That way it would be easier for me to infiltrate the Kaffir education system, get their money and indoctrinate young children with nabhanite ideology!
Hey come on, it is dar al-harb after all : )
Taji set me up, honestly.
Fomboooooooooooooo!!!!!!
Our commitment to community integration will never melt away.
Why look, I even have picture of a white person on the wall behind me………
Taqiyah is part of the curriculum as well as Arabic, Koran chanting, praying etc.
In art classes, painting of living creatures is prohibited and of course music is not allowed to be taught.
<<>>
I bet Arabs did not know that they were Pakis
Gerrit
Do you think that someone as you, who clearly does not know where Asia starts or finishes, is best-suited to discuss education matters – even in jest?
Now do go away, you tiresome troll.
I wonder how many of the ‘witty’ contributors to this thread would appreciate their mother/sister/daughter being the subject of online caption contests.
You’re so right Hassan. The captions in this thread have left me weeping inconsolably. How can they be so mean to my mother/sister/daughter/women?
I must sympathise with you, Hassan.
To be so struck with such precious concerns for the well-being of Hizbi and yet to have not a jot of concern for small children in HT schools being subject to Islamist bigotry; and the over two grand their parents are out of pocket a year for the privilege.
Bless.
Abu Faris
You seem to have inferred an awful lot based on my solitary (and rather tangential) post on this topic. Care to make any more baseless assumptions?
Just responding to your comment above, Hassan.
It strikes me that it is a little telling that you seem more concerned for the feelings of a grown-up and rather experienced HT activist than the good education of the children in her charge.
Care to explain?
Abu Faris,
if Arabs were Asians then they would be called Asians but they are called Arabs because they are Arabs and not Asians. However, Pakistanis do pretend to be Arabs but that does not make Pakistanis to be Arabs.
On the day of Judgement, the sister will have a case against all of you and take your good deeds (if any) when you need them most.
Shameful
Gerrit, Arabia is geographically part of the Asian continent. Ipso facto, Arabs are Asians.
Do drop it; you are making yourself look terminally stupid.
Abdul Rehman – meet Gerrit.
Abu Faris,
This is a caption contest. The subject matter of this caption contest was a young teacher. This young teacher, it seems, is fair game for people of your ilk to poke fun at. I found this objectionable, but it is not to say I have more concern for the teacher than I do for the students.
The fact that the progressive folk at the spitton deem it appropriate to have caption contests at all – trivialising otherwise serious topics with childish playground humour – speaks volumes about the collective character traits of the blog contributors.
So, Abu Faris; would you object to a semi-popular online bloger posting a picture of a beloved family member of yours, and then asking people to add insulting and humiliating captions of their own? All in good fun, of course.
Hassan,
I do apologise. I did not know you were related to Farah Ahmed.
Farah Ahmed is decidedly not a “young teacher”. She is a hard-bitten HT propagandist with a track record of writing deeply unpleasant pieces in the HT in-house hate-mag, of holding absurd and ignorant views of Shakespeare’s writings and telling at least half-truths about the relationship between her school and the Islamist Hizb ut-Tahrir political party.
I think she is fair game, frankly.
Yes AF, my being related to Farah Ahmed is the only reason why I could possibly deem this caption contest to be in poor taste. :rolleyes: There is a huge, vast, gaping chasm between genuine critique on one hand, and childish comments on the other. Continue to defend the latter, if you so wish.
Oh, and when you get a mo – please do answer my question. I’ll repeat it again, in case you missed the first time round:
So, Abu Faris; would you object to a semi-popular online bloger posting a picture of a beloved family member of yours, and then asking people to add insulting and humiliating captions of their own? All in good fun, of course.
You don’t get satire, do you, Hassan?
No, I don’t object to you mocking members of my family.
What I do find odd, however, is why you are taking up cudgels on behalf of someone you claim is not a member of your family.
So, what about it, Hassan? You married to Miss, then?
Ahh. The pieces of the puzzle fall into place. AF’s seeming lack of respect towards his own family members causes him to feel no sense of guilt in mocking those on the outside. I wish you had told this to me earlier so we could have avoided this merry dance. But then, I would have missed out on so much fun.
G’night AF.
Hassan
See ya, teacher’s pet!
Oh – and when are you going to get back to me on your “religious and political reasons” for not liking Jews?
Now, up the wooden hill with you, young man – school tomorrow!
Hassan
The main reason why we do caption competitions is to because it is a great way to parody the self-important hubris of extremists and Islamists in our community who have, for too long, benefited from being grudgingly ignored or excused by the rest of the community.
Satire has a long and deep tradition in Britain, from Hogarth to Swift to Spitting Image to Ianucci. And it is necessary that British Muslims don’t feel that they are exempted from this tradition. Reactions like yours have often given the impression that Muslims lack humour or react badly to it, which is why satirists have politely restrained themselves from parodying Muslims.
But that does not mean that *all* Muslims feel that way or are going to be cowed down by over-sensitive tribalism and the kind of prissy blackmail people like you seem all too eager to use. If we want to get up the noses of extremists, parody is a very effective tool. After all, we’ve grown up with Spitting Image, Monty Python, Blackadder, Jon Stewart etc.
So don’t expect to see the end of the Caption Competition anytime soon.
AF,
Now that really is a misrepresentation of my views! I disagreed with your Zionist stance, from a religious and political perspective. But I have not once stated that I dislike jews, as you implied. I expect an apology, but probably wont get it.
Hassan,
What Effendi wrote.
Here’s the deal, Hassan:
You provide me with your long-promised (but never fulfilled) reasoned explanation for your religious and political rejection of Zionism – and I will consider revising my estimation that for you, as with other Islamists, anti-Zionism is but code for plain, old, ugly, nasty Jew-hatred.
Well, isn’t that lovely. Guilty of racism unless proven otherwise. The fact that I spent the better part of a South American road trip eating at Israeli kosher restaurants with Israelis clearly means nothing. Sigh.
Ah, the old “Some of my best friends are Jews” gambit, Hassan.
Doesn’t wash with me.
You still owe me some explanation for your religious and political exceptions to Zionism. Until you do, I shall just have to assume (because of your evasion) that you are simply another Islamist anti-Semite.
Are you really going to persist with this argument? Anybody who dares disagree with Abu Faris MUST be an anti-semite? My ‘evasion’ of a post topic is, apparently, tantamount to racism? Do you really not see any flaws here?
No, I think you have misunderstood my meaning, Hassan, to be frank.
You wrote that you would get back to me about your “religious and political objections to Zionism”. You never did respond explaining such – and you appear very reticent about sharing them here or now.
Instead, we are confronted with the standard Islamist evasions and even the classic “some of my best friends are…” trope that is trotted out whenever someone feels …umm… evasive about answering a straight question.
Actually, I did not call you out as a racist. I suggested that, as you are clearly rather keen on Islamism, that it would not surprise me to discover that anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism were rather too closely related to each other in your world-view (religious and political, these things being rather inextricable for Islamists). I am surprised, then, that you cannot explain to me your religious and political objections to Zionism, as such an explanation would dispel any nagging doubts about your non-racist credentials.
However, that being said, I am disappointed that you cannot explain to me how Islam might object to the self-determination of a particular people, the Jews. You see that would strike me as exactly the sort of problematic I had in mind you dispelling for me.
Evidently, this distinction between concerns over the trajectory of your Islamist agenda and dubbing you a racist is rather a subtle one for you. I am a little bit taken aback – you struck me as brighter than that.
So far, you have espoused the following:
I am an Islamist
I am an undercover Jew-hater
I am related to Farah Ahmed
You have determined all this based on:
My not responding to your post on Zionism
My questioning the taste of caption contests
—
Now for your post on Zionism. Unfortunately, I haven’t the time, nor frankly, the islamic knowledge to be able to respond as swiftly as I might have liked. But seeing as though you lack even a semblance of patience, I’ll give you a précis of my views.
1. Self determination of the Jewish people should not be at the expense of the Palestinians’ own right to a state, which seems to be the case at the moment.
2. I have no problem with Jews living in their holy land, and even emigrating their en mass. I would prefer – honestly speaking – one state, where Jews, Christians and Muslims live side by side. This is fairytale, I know. But that would be my ideal scenario. In lieu of his, I think Jerusalem should be made an international city, controlled by the UN (as should Makkah and Madinah).
3. Religiously speaking – the actions of Israeli state against Palestinians (anexing of land, settlement building, undermining palestinian rights etc) go against the morals taught by Islam. I cannot comment on ‘zionism in the Quran’ as I have limited understanding in that area.
4. Some of the most violent, callous, Arab-hating Israelis proudly declare themselves as Zionists – the settlers, for instance. It seems odd that you would choose to align yourself with people of this ilk. Perhaps you can clarify this for me.
Finally – I apologies for insinuating that you have a lack of respect for your family. Internet anonymity has a terrible affect on me, it seems.
Hassan.
wrt #4 above – these are the type of settlers I was referring to:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZGrAj5tf3xs&feature=related
Note, that this seems be a extract from BBC newsnight.
You no where deny this.
No, I argued that your reticence in providing any evidence that Zionism was a non-Muslim stance might suggest that you were sheltering a basically anti-Semitic stance behind the guise of “anti-Zionism”. I have already explained this to you.
I t was a J.O.K.E. I realise that Islamists don’t do humour. I think Effendi has already written to you about this.
Yup. More or less – but I think I have expanded on this enough for you to get the point.
You write:
You are conveniently confusing two issues:
(a) the right to self-determination;
(b) the actions of a state.
Consequently, it is a falsehood to claim that the right of Jewish self-determination is “at the expense” of another people. I note that you would seem to indicate that your preference is for the so-called “binational” or One-State solution. It could be argued that this solution is at the expense of both Jewish and Palestinian rights to national self-determination.
I should imagine most Jewish people might regard it as a return, not an “immigration”. Incidentally, most secular Jews would regard it as first a homeland not a “Holy Land” . Jews are an ethnicity, Judaism is a faith.
I agree, the One State solution is probably a (rather dystopian) wish.
Israel already is a state where Jews, Christians and Muslims live side-by-side.
I think (along with a number of other Muslim Zionists) that the Israeli government are the most competent authorities to control Jerusalem. I also believe that it should be recognised internationally as the capital of Israel (this does not preclude the possibility of it also being the capital of Palestine, incidentally).
A shame that you were not around to teach whole generations of Muslim leaders about said morals, then. Given that these policies you assert as those of the Israeli state also match many conducted against religious minorities in Muslim-majority countries (especially Jews). Perhaps you would also condemn, then, the pogroms against Jews in the post WWII period across the Muslim-majority world?
So, actually you have no religious objections to Muslim Zionism, rather you have a one-sided pseudo-moral set of objections to perceived excesses of the Israeli state.
I do not align myself with such people. You align all Zionists with such people.
And some of the most violent, callous, Jew-hating people proudly declare themselves to be Muslims. It seems odd that you would choose to align yourself with people of this ilk. Perhaps you would care to clarify this for me?
They would find it very amusing, I can assure you. We are quite grown up in my family. Sometime we even have rows with each other and CALL EACH OTHER NAMES too. Hey, that’s the moral breakdown of the family for you!
You no where deny this.
No, I argued that your reticence in providing any evidence that Zionism was a non-Muslim stance might suggest that you were sheltering a basically anti-Semitic stance behind the guise of “anti-Zionism”. I have already explained this to you.
I t was a J.O.K.E. I realise that Islamists don’t do humour. I think Effendi has already written to you about this.
You have determined all this based on:
My not responding to your post on Zionism
My questioning the taste of caption contests
Yup.
You write:
You are conveniently confusing two issues:
(a) the right to self-determination;
(b) the actions of a state.
Consequently, it is a falsehood to claim that the right of Jewish self-determination is “at the expense” of another people. I note that you would seem to indicate that your preference is for the so-called “binational” or One-State solution. It could be argued that this solution is at the expense of both Jewish and Palestinian rights to national self-determination.
I should imagine most Jewish people might regard it as a return, not an “immigration”. Incidentally, most secular Jews would regard it as first a homeland not a “Holy Land” . Jews are an ethnicity, Judaism is a faith.
I agree, the One State solution is probably a (rather dystopian) wish.
Israel already is a state where Jews, Christians and Muslims live side-by-side.
I think (along with a number of other Muslim Zionists) that the Israeli government are the most competent authorities to control Jerusalem. I also believe that it should be recognised internationally as the capital of Israel (this does not preclude the possibility of it also being the capital of Palestine, incidentally).
A shame that you were not around to teach whole generations of Muslim leaders about said morals, then. Given that these policies you assert as those of the Israeli state also match many conducted against religious minorities in Muslim-majority countries (especially Jews). Perhaps you would also condemn, then, the pogroms against Jews in the post WWII period across the Muslim-majority world?
So, actually you have no religious objections to Muslim Zionism, rather you have a one-sided pseudo-moral set of objections to perceived excesses of the Israeli state.
I do not align myself with such people. You align all Zionists with such people.
And some of the most violent, callous, Jew-hating people proudly declare themselves to be Muslims. It seems odd that you would choose to align yourself with people of this ilk. Perhaps you would care to clarify this for me?
They would find it very amusing, I can assure you. We are quite grown up in my family. Sometime we even have rows with each other and CALL EACH OTHER NAMES too. Hey, that’s the moral breakdown of the family for you!
Abu Faris,
“You no where deny this.”
No where on the Spittoon do you deny that you are a Mongolian herdsman. Unless you categorically do so, I will be forced to assume that you spend the better part of your day grazing sheep on the Monglion steppe. –> For the record, NO – I am not an Islamist.
“You are conveniently confusing two issues:
(a) the right to self-determination;
(b) the actions of a state.”
Perhaps I should make this clear. When the act of self determination, not right – act – impinges on the rights and freedom of another people, this act is not something that I can support. The right, yes. The forceful takeover of another peoples land at the behest of the Mandatory (ie Britain), no.
“I should imagine most Jewish people might regard it as a return, not an “immigration”. Incidentally, most secular Jews would regard it as first a homeland not a “Holy Land” . Jews are an ethnicity, Judaism is a faith.”
Fair enough. The Palestinians too, have a ‘right to return’? Do they not?
“A shame that you were not around to teach whole generations of Muslim leaders about said morals, then. Given that these policies you assert as those of the Israeli state also match many conducted against religious minorities in Muslim-majority countries (especially Jews). Perhaps you would also condemn, then, the pogroms against Jews in the post WWII period across the Muslim-majority world?”
It is a shame, yes. Because the dictatorships in the Muslim world are indeed, rotten. And yes, I will, too, condemn the pogroms against Jews carried out by Muslims. However, i do not see what this has to do with this current discussion? Your line of reasoning (if it can be called that) seems to be “Well, lets forget about those Israelis…because Muslims do far worse” – which may very well be true, but it’s not the matter currently up for discussion now, is it? Why must you deflect any criticism of the Israeli state onto the misdoings of supposedly Muslim ones? This is similar to those right wing loons, who, when asked about the bulding of Mosques in the UK, respond with something along the lines of “Well, Saudi Arabia don’t allow buildings of churches”. But, that isnt the point you see: “I’m not defending Saudi Arabia’s policy, I’m criticising yours!”. Analogously, my criticism of Israeli state actions should not be taken as a defence of Saudi/Sudanese/Pakistani/ state actions.
For the most part, I condemn these states. I am generally appalled by the somewhat sheepish response given by some Muslims to the ethnic cleansing in Darfur, or the rights of non-arabs in the gulf, or the second-class status afforded to Indians in Malaysia, or the tretment of Palestinians by some of their arab hosts, or the use of young Iraqi girls as prostitutes in Syria, or the treatment of the Bihar people by Bangladesh and so on.
“So, actually you have no religious objections to Muslim Zionism, rather you have a one-sided pseudo-moral set of objections to perceived excesses of the Israeli state.”
I’m generally uncomfortable with providing too much of my own quranic exegesis. However, I’m sure your Muslim Zionist stance is probably a minority one amongst the Ulema. Not to say that it is necessarily wrong, just that it is not necessarily right either.
“And some of the most violent, callous, Jew-hating people proudly declare themselves to be Muslims. It seems odd that you would choose to align yourself with people of this ilk. Perhaps you would care to clarify this for me?”
Duely noted. Zionists, like Muslims, come in many different shades and colours. What shade are you?
“They would find it very amusing, I can assure you. We are quite grown up in my family. Sometime we even have rows with each other and CALL EACH OTHER NAMES too. Hey, that’s the moral breakdown of the family for you!”
Your family sound like a hoot, mashaalah. May Allah preserve you and them.
Hassan.
PS – How do you use the quote function?
Hassan,
Thanks for the reply.
Quotes are activated by using HTML tag “blockquote”
See here:
http://www.w3schools.com/TAGS/tag_blockquote.asp
PS – How do you use the quote function?
Use the “blockquote” HTML tags for best effect, especially for multi-line passages. For short sentences or phrases, italicizing (with the “i” tags) can be enough (and much less to type!:-))
Hassan
Damn, my secret is out. Time to disassemble the yurt, pack up the satellite dish and be off into the Gobi Desert!
You just have a bit of a soft-spot for them, though?
Well, that is actually not what happened. Britain did not “cede” Palestine to the founders of the state of Israel, nor was it at Britain’s behest that Israel declared independence. Incidentally, it was not Britain, but the USSR (irony of ironies) who were the first to recognise Israeli independence.
Effectively, your position is that you support the right of the Jewish people to self-determination just in case this right remains entirely not acted upon. Your “support” is for an abstract “right”, not the concrete exercise of this right at all. Your position is tantamount to a denial of the right of Israel to exist.
What has the Palestinian right of return to do with the right of the Jewish people to national self-determination in the form of the state of Israel? Are you suggesting that just in case the Palestinians return, Jews might also be allowed to exercise their right to national self-determination?
Incidentally, your position is crude in comparison to the position of the PLO (at least since 1989), which argues for the right of return as follows:
The right of return just in case this is feasible, practical or possible. Where it is not so, the right to proper compensation, independently assessed.
Understandably, many Jews whose families hailed from the Arab world would like something similar in terms of compensation for their losses in the period of pogroms and exile that followed WWII.
It is a shame, yes. Because the dictatorships in the Muslim world are indeed, rotten. And yes, I will, too, condemn the pogroms against Jews carried out by Muslims. However, i do not see what this has to do with this current discussion?
Really. Fascinating. Only Muslim Palestinians are to be taken into consideration, then?
This is not my line of reasoning at all. My line of reasoning is that unless one takes a balanced and fair approach to these issues, one will get aboslutely nowhere. You were the one who wanted to raise the canard about how beastly some Jewish extremists are to Palestinians as a way of bolstering your anti-Israeli rhetoric. I was simply responding.
Yes, actually it is – because you raised this issue in the first place! Your position would appear to be that only Muslim losses should be taken into account.
Waffle.
My position is actually based on that of one of the most senior members of the Italian ‘ulema, actually.
However, let’s leave exegeses firmly in the hands of henna-bearded semi-literates, who think the acme of education is the ability to memorise vast swathes of text and regurgitate 700 year old interpretations without ever once putting into gear their own God-given brains. Let’s let the much vaunted ulema, with its dismal record of Jew-hatred, woman-hatred, gay-bashing, racism and assorted bigotries, to make such decisions. After all, look at the incredible Islamic world their leadership has afforded the Faithful so far!
I’m a Mongolian herdsman, remember?
Oh, you are indeed a twister of words. I tell you what, if this Mongolian herdsman thing doesnt work out, you can find a job in the new Labour spin machine. And considering how uber PeeCee Labour is, I’m sure they’ll even build you a yurt in Whitehall!
I do not have a problem with the act of self determination, which you implied, but, rather, when said act “impinges on the rights and freedom of another people”. There is a difference.
Eh? What is this comment in reference to?
Could have fooled me. Which, incidentally, is not at all that difficult.
And a darn good one.
That’s me done with this debate. It’s been fun. It’s been informative. But I’ve got a stack of assignments to write. Toodles.
Hassan
Ignore one above. Heres the same thing. Properly blockquoted.
Abu Faris,
Oh, you are indeed a twister of words. I tell you what, if this Mongolian herdsman thing doesnt work out, you can find a job in the new Labour spin machine. And considering how uber PeeCee Labour is, I’m sure they’ll even build you a yurt in Whitehall!
I do not have a problem with the act of self determination, which you implied, but, rather, when said act “impinges on the rights and freedom of another people”. There is a difference.
Eh? What is this comment in reference to?
Could have fooled me. Which, incidentally, is not at all that difficult.
And a darn good one.
That’s me done with this debate. It’s been fun. It’s been informative. But I’ve got a stack of assignments to write. Toodles.
Hassan
Yawn. I drew my opinions on the bases of what you wrote. If I misunderstood your meaning, you might want to explain yourself in another way. Resorting, as you do, to a stream of rather daft, evasive remarks might suggest that, in point of fact, I was rather accurate in my depiction of your position.
In other words, you clearly do have a problem with the act of national self-determination. Again, you have no problem with it in theory; but you have rather a large problem with this particular practice of the right of self-determination. I wonder why.
Not the one you had in mind though, I would wager.
Your desire to condemn an entire political movement (Zionism) on the basis of particular excesses of some of its more extreme supporters; and yet not apply the same criteria in your estimation of Islamist movements (for example). I thought I had made that clear.
I am sure you are right. However, I was not trying to fool you. I was trying to explain my objections fo your Islamist-lite anti-Zionism.
Flattery will get you everywhere.
She’s a hard taskmistress is Farah Ahmed when it comes to homework. My sympathies. Have your parents thought about sending you to another school?
The problem with the internet, it seems, is its quite astonishing ability to suck people away from productivity. Sigh.
Here goes, again:
No, no and NO. The act of self determination is absolutely, and completely commendable. However, this act should not imfringe upon the rights of others. I seem to have said the same thing about three times now.
Oh, I’m Islamist-lite now, it seems. Maybe one day, you’ll refer to me as just a regular Muslim.
You’re telling me! We spent the better part of the day cutting out card-board fish (see original picture).
Toodles (mean it this time!)
Hassan.
Abu Fakir
Arabs, the original inhabitants of the Arabian peninsula.
Arabs are an ethnic group who are identified along linguistic, cultural or genealogical grounds.
No matter how hard Pakistanis try pretending to be Arabs, they will always be regarded with contempt by the Arabs as they do now.
Do go away, you tiresome troll.
Hassan,
The comment above was aimed at Gerrit, who is an offensive oaf and troll. You are neither.
Re-read what you initially wrote about the right of self-determination and reflect upon what “rights” mean…
“Islamist-lite” – OK; but you do seem to have a big soft-spot for these people.