But was it wrong…?

Considered criticism of any aspect of Islam(or Judaism or Christianity) is not Islamophobia or ( Judaismophobia or Christianophobia ) either.

Obviously one pays notice to context , timing, language and tone when criticising anything or anybody , but you should be allowed to do it without being dismissed as being racist.

Christianity used to be similarly proselytising.

Yes, witz, as I understand it, extreme islamists want to impose their laws and caliphate on everyone else. This is a religio-political thing rather than just a religious belief system.

I think it is extreme Islamism that those grassroots Tories (and probably non-Tories) fear, not ordinary Muslim people.

Fear of extreme Islamism is not Islamophobia.

Islamophobia is irrational dislike/hatred of Muslims.

Hilarious watching various hapless Tories avoid the question. The reason Sunak, Dowden and other Tories can't categorise Anderson as a racist and Islamophobe is they know they have a lot of Tory MPs and grass roots members who support his views but they can't admit that otherwise they would be accepting Lady Warsi is right about Islamophobia being rife in the Tory party.

I think we need a new word. Muslims are not a race, in the way that the vast majority of Jewish people are, since Jewishness descends via the mother.
Muslims come in all different colours and converts are not uncommon.
How about ‘religionist’?

'Not the sharpest knife in the block...' can say that again!

The BBC seems to think that Anderson actually used the term "Islamist" .
Anderson doesn't strike me as the sharpest knife in the block and I honestly wonder if he himself understands the terms that he is using.
A main point has to be whether Anderson's belief that the Mayor(and/or London itself) is under the disproportionate CONTROL of any group is correct or not.
If Sadiq and the London Council are not under the disproportionate control of any group then one of the most significant issues re Anderson's statement is that , simply, it is a factually WRONG statement.
Of course he would be wrong to conflate All Muslims with the the term "Islamists" which I have always understood to mean extremists .
I think Easybee and Baggs make good points.

Iam64

MaizieD
Anderson's statement was not an opinion. It was a completely unfounded racist slander designed to perpetuate fear.
Exactly
If the word black or Jew was substituted they’d be no argument. Nor should there be

Completely agree.

MaizieD

Anderson's statement was not an opinion. It was a completely unfounded racist slander designed to perpetuate fear.

Exactly
If the word black or Jew was substituted they’d be no argument. Nor should there be

Anderson's statement was not an opinion. It was a completely unfounded racist slander designed to perpetuate fear.

Baggs

Jew is not equivalent to Islamist.

In the case we are discussing, which was Anderson's perpetuation of the politically planted and encouraged belief that Muslims are immanently going to take over the UK (supported by a number of Gnet posters), along with, also planted, belief that all Muslims are potential Islamic terrorists who wish ill to the UK, it seems like a perfectly valid substitution to me.

The argument that it isn't racist because Islamists are not a race and Jews are is refuted by the working definition of Islamophobia produced by an All Party Parliamentary Group

“Islamophobia is rooted in racism and is a type of racism that targets expressions of Muslimness or perceived Muslimness”

Baroness Wasi details how it was developed here on a twitter thread:

twitter.com/SayeedaWarsi/status/1762033144541171940

If you can't / don't 'do' twitter I can copy and paste it for you.

It was all a veritable word salad wasn’t it?

Baggs

Many opinions are wrong but this doesn't mean that they should not be expressed. I think there exists a real (i.e. not phobic) fear of extreme Islamism, which is not the same as being unreasonably prejudiced against Muslims. The latter would be wrong.

I entirely agree.

Baggs

Many opinions are wrong but this doesn't mean that they should not be expressed. I think there exists a real (i.e. not phobic) fear of extreme Islamism, which is not the same as being unreasonably prejudiced against Muslims. The latter would be wrong.

This.

Jew is not equivalent to Islamist.

Well put eazybee

I think a good test would be to substitute Jew for Islamist in these 'conversations' and see how they then bear scrutiny.

This would, of course, also apply to conversations, such as Anderson's, where 'Islamist' is implied rather than explicitly stated.

I heard a considerable amount of sensible discussion about the use of language and the meaning of words.

Use 'Islamaphobic' plus 'hatred' plus 'racism' and it is an effective way of closing down most conversations on the subject.

One has only to watch transgender groups and their use of 'transphobic' in response to any expression of unease about this subject to see how it is applied.

Many opinions are wrong but this doesn't mean that they should not be expressed. I think there exists a real (i.e. not phobic) fear of extreme Islamism, which is not the same as being unreasonably prejudiced against Muslims. The latter would be wrong.

They simply talk gibberish

It was quite ridiculous!