You seem to have purposefully misconstrued what I said about Qaradawi and Saddem Hussein! Please re-read the sentence that followed on from the one that you have commented on, in which I drew a clear distinction between the two men. It read: "Men hailing from vastly differing schools of thought but who share two traits calculated to make some on the Left go weak at the knees: they are brown and Muslim." For my part, I deliberately chose to use the expression "the likes of", as it's obviously something of a bugbear of yours. And yes: I was being provocative. On the other hand, what really annoyed me about your earlier posting, was your uncritical acceptance of any claim made by Abou Jahjah, that he, or the AEL, stands on the Left. How absurd! If Nick Griffin was to assert that he and the BNP are, in actual fact, fellow travellers on the European Left and are simply misunderstood; would you be so ready to accept his statement at face value? I think both you and I know the answer to that one. Please don’t make the mistake of assuming that I disagree with all of the points you have raised. Yet we are, where we are and, it is incumbent on us all to better understand the real nature of militant Islamism and the threat it poses, in most of its guises, to those of us who chose to exercise our right to disagree. Or, are you unfamiliar with the role mapped out for both the “al-kafirun” and “al-mushrikun” in an Islamist earthly paradise? At the extent of appearing patronising, I suggest you dig a little deeper into the AEL and what it really stands for. Don’t allow yourself to be fobbed off so easily.

Dear Ms Bechler, Where do I start? Well, before I respond to some of your points, I’d like to know if you either endorse, or sympathise, with the following statement recently penned by Mr Dyab Abou Jahjah pertaining to the recent destruction of the Imam Ali shrine in Samara: “Breaking down the Iraqi resistance is to be achieved through unleashing a total civil war between Sunni and Shi’a Arabs in Iraq. That will lead to Kurdish control of the state under the support of the US and its allies and on top of them the Zionist colonial, racist, apartheid entity. An Iraqi civil war will lead also to paralyzing the weapons of the resistance through turning them inwards against their own people. The criminals who have blown up the Imam Al Hadi dome in Samara, one of the holiest shrines of Shi’a Muslims, are very aware of this goal and are serving directly the interest of the occupation forces". Now, there are conspiracy theories and there is downright mischief making. Which of these do you think Dyab Abou Jahjah is indulging in? To my mind, it seems to be indicative of a certain mindset, prevalent in many Islamist quarters, that attributes all things negative to either the United States or the Israeli government. There is an almost total refusal to countenance the possibility that, any Muslim, however deranged, might commit acts in the active service of a sinister agenda. In short, it’s the fault of the infidel, all of the time. Cod's wallop. I do not know whether you personally adhere to the tenets of any of the “madhhabs” of Sunni Islam, and do not care, but why are you so willing to suspend your critical judgement when appraising the AEL? I’ve read all of your points but am still left with the feeling that you’ve allowed yourself to be taken in. Yet, unlike me, I think you would agree that many an Islamist, would be much exercised by identifying the religious faith of any non-Muslim who dared proffer an argument that ran contrary to his/her Weltanschauung. As a rule, it’s a Jewish origin that is sought out and, if found, scurrilously used to smear and discredit their opponent. Neither do I care much for your distinction between kalashnikov totting militant Islamists, and their more cuddly fellow travellers in sharp suits. Call me an old-fashioned secularist- and trenchant supporter of the French principle of “laïcité” and the “l’état laïc”- but as soon as any political wannabe founds a movement informed by religious values, that person immediately alienates any potential supporter who does not ascribe to that faith. It is for this reason, that I have no truck with such mainstream political parties such as the CDU in Germany. What kind of message does the retention of the word Christian in their title sends out to: atheists, Jews, Muslims, Hindus etc? I would even go so far as to posit, that the party’s insistence on retaining its explicitly “Christian” credentials: have cost it the votes of many voters of Turkish origin. So please excuse me if I have a long, deep, belly laugh at your assertion that, if Abou Jahjah had his way: “‘the working class’ or ‘the oppressed’, Muslim and non-Muslim alike, could quite possibly, as long as this was achieved non-violently, be better off.” If you actually believe this and are not simply being obtuse, then I’m afraid you’ve got it worse than even I had earlier thought! Why do you consistently fail to address my query as to the role marked out for “al- kafirun” and “al-mushrikun” in any state presided over by an Islamist administration, however mild? Now, there’s a title for a future article for you:”The Infidel: His Fate in the Caliphate reborn.” Or, could it be, that you would be happy with the “People of the Book” (Jews and Christians) becoming reduced to “dhimma” status and being compelled to pay the “jizya/cizye” poll tax to guarantee the freedom to practice their faith? Where would that leave Hindus and Sikhs in UK, or Vietnamese Buddhists in France? Not to mention, the overwhelming majority of north-western Europeans who are not “God botherers” of any description? I think we all know the position taken by Islamists on atheism. And herein lies the rub. How on earth can anyone so apparently familiar with Marxist dialectics, as you must surely be, wish to be associated with Abou Jahjah or political Islamism? Need I remind you of Marx’s take on religion? Words fail me… Please excuse me a trite comparison but, over the course of the last five years, I’ve belatedly come to understand how many a British communist must have felt in the late 1930’s when Hitler and Stalin signed the Molotov Pact. The continued appeasement of various Islamist apostles by those who see themselves as hailing from the Left can only be a sign of decadency. I have a great deal of respect for the time and trouble that you have taken to look into contemporary Islamist politicking and those themes that directly impinge on Muslims living in Europe. I’d also like to take the opportunity to point out that my words do not apply to Tariq Ramadan. I only wish that more people had taken the trouble to read the works of his grandfather Hasan al-Banna and, perhaps then, so many Europeans wouldn’t be so confused by the various strands of Islamist thinking. I would, however, caution you into accepting at face value that such a phenomenon as “European Islam” actually exists. On this point, if not on much else, I would agree with the Salafists that, “Islam is Islam”. Whilst it is undoubtedly true that Islam can be practised in Europe in as many multifarious guises as anywhere else in the world, it remains, nonetheless for all that, Islam. This in itself, sits at direct variance with the Salafists, who see Islam as a monolithic entity. I suggest, that if any Muslim wants to see how Islam has actually been lived continuously for centuries in Europe, then they need look no further than to the Balkans. If there could ever be such a thing as “European” Islam, that’s where one would find it. Yet, on closer inspection, it becomes immediately clear that since the 14th century when Slavic, Albanian and Greek Christians first began converting en masse to various brands of Islamic teaching, Islam has been marked by its flexibility of approach. I also probably do not need to remind you, that many of those political thinkers who grappled with how to best salvage the Ottoman State from destruction and, along with it, the Caliphate, were “European” Muslims born in cities such as Thessaloniki, like Mustafa Kemal Ataturk. Men, who would now, I’m sure, be regarded by most Islamists as apostates to Islam. Whatever their merits, the founders of the Turkish state at the end of the Great War, well appreciated the lunacy of the Islamists of their own day. You need to ask yourself the question, that if political Islamism offers its adherents and, the wider community, such a promising future, then why did Ataturk plump for secularism and the separation of mosque from state? I’d suggest that the explicitly “Islamist” policies of Sultan Abdul Hamid II, caused such havoc from 1876-1909, that to revisit them today, would be insanity. In the light of this, it is absolutely imperative, that we Europeans do not divide ourselves politically along religious and sectarian lines. Solidarity and not separatism should be our watchwords. Not faith-led apartheid.