When will people learn that anti-Islam is not the same thing as racism? How long shall this ignorant prejudice prevail?

@Henry
I'm sure you see a clear distinction, just like the distinction some people make between anti-Semitism and "anti-Judaism," but I think it can easily get lost in the general rush towards xenophobia these days. For now I'm sticking with Bishop Brunne.

Then tell me, please! What race is a Muslim?

Henry, I agree, it isn't racism. It should be called bigotry. Which is a subspecies of ignorance.

Ignorance is when you haven't read the book, the history of the religion and its founder. Prejudice is when you base your judgements on that ignorance. And that's a sub-species of stupidity, Benjamin.

look who's back.

It seems like nothing you can do can make a fucking bigot happy these days. Geesh.

Culture and tribalism are so prevalent it's discouraging. Don't discount the latent anti-semitism. It is still very present, and dangerous. (Despite a lack of US analysis on the Israel-Palestine situation). You might enjoy Wallander, PBS Masterpiece Mystery. A dying woman might have said farmer, or foreigner, or... Because of a leak to the press, a skinhead murdered an immigrant in revenge. This is fiction, but close to the truth. Sweden is struggling as we all are with multiculturalism - race, nationality, religion, ethnicity. Problems are all alive and well. Ouch. R

They're sensitive souls, you know.

Please delete the spam comments.

Racism is appropriate if the Muslims are non-Swedes or even non-European.

Let me clarify, racism is the appropriate term (but the sinful action).

The actions of the Swedish Democrats may or may not have had to do with racism, Michael, but it was Alan who related it to Islam and Muslims as targets. He doesn't tell us of what the Bishop said, or anything of the specific reasons for the walkout, but simply infers through bringing up Muslims at the end of the article that they were the target. Perhaps "racism" is a code word now in Sweden for anti-Islamic immigration in the country? We don't know. He tells us nothing of the content, but only that the topic was racism.

Meanwhile here we have several comments offering nothing but insults and name calling, the hallmark of ignorant bigots if they would only open their eyes to the fact. They know little or nothing about those they sling the names at, but it's sufficient that they are called right wing and racists to get them called bigots by people bringing nothing to the argument beyond the name calling. Not a whole lot of intelligence involved there. None think to ask any questions. Was it about Islam and Muslim immigrants? Was it about the potential dangers of that? Are there any potential dangers in that?

Right here in our own country we just yesterday saw it reported that the Pakistani born man who tried to set off a car bomb in Times Square was sentenced to life in prison for his act of attempted mass murder. I've been saying for some time that the Koran says that Muslims should emigrate in the cause of Islam, and that it is a tenet of Islam that lying in its cause is good and one of the three reasons for telling a lie that its justified in Islam. And right there in that courtroom we saw apparently brought to light the validity of both warnings. Judge Miriam Cederbaum questioned the defendant about his oath of allegiance sworn when he became a U.S. citizen. From a Washington Post story on the sentencing: "As Shahzad defended his actions, Cedarbaum at one point cut him off to ask whether he had sworn allegiance to the United States when he became a U.S. citizen last year.

'I did swear, but I did not mean it,' Shahzad said."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/05/AR2010100505683.html

And there in a nutshell is the import of what those instructions and doctrines mean to the security of any nation to which accepts believers of Islam as immigrants. But try telling that here without charges of racism, xenophobia and/or bigotry. That's if any bother to answer. The majority have no knowledge of the religion and so don't try to respond to an intelligent argument about it. None of these here showed up on my blog site to dispute my posts against it over the recent anniversary of the World Trade Center and Pentagon attacks. There were a few who attempted to do so, but none of thesewere among them, including Alan himself who I have called before on his false charges of racism against those who are against Islam and vocal about it, such as Dutch politician Geert Wilders. It seems that for some, lacking any knowledge about their subject they can only resort to name calling rather than trying to actually educate themselves on the topic.

@Henry
Thanks for keeping the discussion going, but your comments mystify me. In fact, if you actually read my post I actually quote the bishop's words, and point out that she referred to recent anti-racist demonstrations in Sweden. What more do you want to hear? Regarding you statement "It seems that for some, lacking any knowledge about their subject they can only resort to name calling rather than trying to actually educate themselves on the topic," I don't know where you get the impression that I know nothing about these issues, since I deal with them on a daily basis, have traveled extensively in the Arab world, and live in a city with hundreds of thousands of Muslim residents, some of whom I deal with every day. My daily walk to work also takes me past three Jewish institutions under heavy police protection, which always gives me pause.

However, I will admit to a belief in the "slippery slope" theory of racism, hence my reference to those subtle souls who can easily distinguish, for example, anti-Semitism, anti-Zionism, and anti-Judaism. You should be aware that once xenophobia becomes policy, the result tends to be "kill them all and let God sort them out."

Alan, you are right. You have called me on something where I was clearly wrong. I should have gone back and re-read your article before responding again this morning. You do quote the Bishop's words as translated-- presumably she was actually speaking in Swedish. However, that coupled with your qoute from Abraham Foxman in the letter to the editor of the New York Times who states that "The Sweden Democrats are clearly anti-Muslim..." raises again ties her words if correctly translated on anti-racism demonstrations to the actual views according to Mr. Foxman of the Swedish Democrats of anti-Muslim do make my question to you of just what race is a Muslim also equally valid to the Bishop and all the people of those demonstrations if they were protesting the anti-Muslim views of the Swedish Democrats.

You think that it is quite all right to apply the term loosely, but I've seen it used so often just to silence opposition under the guise of false charges of racism that it is absolutely not all right, and given the nature of Islam and its set goal of world domination, commanded jihad of all believers, encouragement to emigrate in its cause as well as to lie in its cause leading to activities by believers such as the attacks on the World Trade Center, the assault by Major Nadal Hassan on fellow soldiers at Ft. Hood as well as the attempted car bombing in New Your's Times Square by the Pakistani Shazad who quite proudly stated that he didn't mean it when he pledged allegiance to the United States makes it very imperative that we stop the false labeling racism to those who are telling the truth about Islam such as Geert Wilders of the Netherlands and apparantly the Swedish Democrats as well, it being stated that their objections are against the religion of those they opp0se.

Shazad was lying in the cause of his religion when he swore allegiance to the United States in keeping with its tenets leading to his attempted mass murder of innocents in Times Square and no less a personage than the Grand Mufti of Egypt, Dr. Ali Gomaaa, lied in the cause of his religion in trying to shunt any scrutiny of the religion in the case of the Ft. Hood Islamic murderer Major Hasan.

Writing in the Washington Post November 7, 2009, Gomaa said “I was shocked as any sensible human being was when I learned about the senseless, appalling and cowardly act of violence in Fort Hood. This horrific attack is a complete violation of Islamic law and norms and the perpetrator is no way representative of the Muslim people or the religion of Islam. God upholds the sanctity of life as a universal principle.‘and do not kill one another, for God is indeed merciful unto you' says the Quran in (4:29). “

http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/guestvoices/2009/11/egypts_grand

The Grand Mufti is a position of chief expositor of Sharia law for a country or region, and so Dr. Gomaa is the equivalent of a Chief Jusitice of Sharia law for Egypt. And he deliberately misquoted the verse in the Quran to mislead the infidels into believing that is says something different than what that verse actually says and perpetute the lie that Islam is a peaceful religion. I explained that lie and showed the actual verse in three different translations to show exactly what it says and how Dr. Gomaa was lieing in keeping with the tenet of lieing in the cause of his religion, in my post "Taqqiya: Lying in the cause of Islam" found here:

http://open.salon.com/blog/henryr/2010/09/11/taqqiya_lying_in_the_cause_of_islam

If Machiavelli had turned his efforts to how to seized and keep power through religion rather than politics he could not have done better than Islam. And to continue inciting people to believe the lie that it is racism, xenophobia (both words used by you) and bigotry (thrown about by others) to tell the truth about this religion is not just dishonest and slanderous but is potentially aiding and abetting more acts of terrorism possibly far more destructive than those we have seen so far.